Navy and Marine Boards Vote to Keep Nine of Twelve Troops, Reportedly

The panels created to carry out Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's ban on transgender service members are not always voting the way the policy would suggest. According to a New York Times report published Friday, Navy and Marine Corps separation boards voted to retain transgender troops in nine of the twelve cases the paper identified. We could not locate the Times report itself, which means the account here comes secondhand, through the Daily Wire, Breitbart and other outlets, and should be checked against the original.

The Times found no similar pattern in the Army or Air Force, where boards have voted to discharge "overwhelmingly," as the Daily Wire summarized the findings. The split matters because it suggests the services may be applying the same policy differently.

Some caution is in order. The figures come from a single newspaper's count, built from interviews with service members and their lawyers, because the Pentagon has not released outcomes. Twelve cases is a small sample, not an official tally.

How the Ban Reached the Boards

President Trump signed the executive order a week into his second term, in January 2025. According to ZeroHedge, the Supreme Court allowed the ban to take effect on May 6, 2025, and Hegseth followed two days later with a memo giving active-duty troops until June 6 and reservists until July 7 to leave voluntarily.

The administration has defended the policy on grounds of readiness and deployability, the Advocate reported.

According to WION and ZeroHedge, Marine boards at Quantico, Virginia, voted to keep Marines, and Navy boards did the same. Those outlets are the source for that detail; it is not something we could confirm independently.

The Cases Behind the Count

One of those retained is Marine Staff Sgt. Damien Contreras, a supply and logistics specialist with three overseas deployments, whose board recommended in August that he stay. He described the hearing to the Times in plain terms, as relayed by the Advocate: "You have war fighters looking at war fighters."

Not every case is so clean. Navy Lt. Clara Winchell, a plaintiff in litigation against the policy, went before a board in September that found her disqualified under the policy but said her record warranted retention, and it recommended postponing her separation while the lawsuits play out. Another plaintiff, identified in the notes only as Talbott, told the Advocate he is invoking his right to a board of inquiry. His full name and details should be verified. At least one panel did vote to remove a service member over a gender dysphoria diagnosis and related medical care, though the details of that case are unclear.

Defiance or Discretion

Breitbart and the Daily Wire both framed the votes as boards defying Hegseth's orders. That is a reading of the results, not something board members have said. The services declined to discuss outcomes or make board members available, citing ongoing litigation, and the Defense Department declined to comment, Breitbart reported.

What explanations exist come from outside experts. Priya Rashid, a military attorney for trans troops, pointed to Marine loyalty: "I think they are looking for a way to give a fellow Marine the benefit of the doubt." A second expert, identified as VanLandingham, suggested dissatisfaction with Pentagon leadership may be a factor. Neither view has been confirmed by anyone who sat on a board.

ZeroHedge reported that Rashid told NPR in February that outcomes are "generally predetermined" and that each board costs about $22,000. That claim rests on ZeroHedge's account alone.

The Vote Is Not the Last Word

A board's vote is a recommendation, not a final ruling. An October 2025 memo from Undersecretary Anthony Tata, obtained by the Associated Press according to ZeroHedge, lets commanders overturn a board's decision to keep a transgender service member. As the Advocate noted, a favorable vote does not guarantee anyone a future in uniform.

Litigation adds another layer. Breitbart noted that U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes blocked the Pentagon from implementing the policy without a waiver, though the timing and scope of that ruling, and how it squares with the Supreme Court's order, could not be confirmed for this story.

What happens next is not yet clear. Commanders could override board recommendations under the Tata memo, and the courts remain in play. The Pentagon has not said how it will respond, and the lawsuits involving Winchell and others continue.