The Advocate
A federal judge has once again stopped the Trump administration from transferring transgender women in federal custody to men’s prisons, finding that 14 incarcerated women are likely to succeed in their challenge to a policy that would strip prison officials of the ability to consider their individual safety. In a ruling issued Sunday, U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth granted a preliminary injunction barring the Bureau of Prisons from implementing a provision of President Donald Trump's Executive Order 14168 against the plaintiffs, a group of transgender women who say the policy would expose them to grave risks of violence, sexual assault, and other harms. The order requires the Bureau of Prisons to maintain the women's current placements in women's prisons and halfway houses while the litigation proceeds. Lamberth found that each of the 14 women had demonstrated that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims, and are likely to suffer imminent and irreparable harm absent relief. Related : Appeals court clears path to move trans women into men’s prisons despite sexual assault risk The case stems from Trump's January 20, 2025, executive order directing federal agencies to recognize only two sexes and requiring federal prisons to house people according to sex assigned at birth. The policy threatened to remove transgender women from women's prisons regardless of their medical history, prior placement decisions, or documented safety concerns. Lamberth first intervened in early 2025, concluding that the plaintiffs had shown a likelihood of success on claims that forcing transgender women into men's prisons would violate their constitutional rights. The legal battle took a turn in April when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit largely upheld the plaintiffs' ability to challenge the policy but instructed Lamberth to make more individualized findings regarding the specific harms facing each plaintiff before continuing injunctive relief. The appeals court noted that the record contained "ample, uncontested evidence" that some plaintiffs possessed characteristics making them uniquely vulnerable to harm in men's prisons, including histories of sexual assault, self-harm, and gender-affirming medical treatment. Related : Federal judge blocks Trump’s transfer of transgender women to men’s prisons Sunday’s ruling was the district court's response. After reviewing individualized evidence submitted for each woman, Lamberth concluded that the plaintiffs had established a substantial risk of serious harm if transferred. The judge rejected the government's argument that low reported assault rates at the men's facilities where the women would be housed resolved the issue, writing that "the relevant question under the objective prong is whether Plaintiffs face a substantial risk of violence by virtue of their distinctive characteristics." In its opinion , the court pointed to evidence that the plaintiffs are not typical prisoners arriving at those facilities, but rather "newly arrived, visibly feminized transgender women coming from a women's prison" who face heightened risks of victimization. Lamberth also cited expert testimony that transfers from women's prisons to men's facilities increase vulnerability by "marking the transferee as a target" and can leave transgender women exposed to physical violence, sexual assault, and severe psychological distress. Lamberth sharply criticized the government's argument that any resulting harm could simply be treated after the fact. "It is fundamentally unreasonable for prison officials to respond to serious risks such as mental health deterioration, self-harm, and suicide by intentionally creating those risks and offering to treat them after they predictably occur," he wrote. The judge further faulted the Bureau for adopting a categorical transfer policy without first considering whether individual plaintiffs could be housed safely in women's facilities. Related : Federal judge again blocks Trump from moving trans women into men’s prisons Lamberth ultimately concluded that the Bureau’s policy failed to account for the plaintiffs' documented vulnerabilities. The judge also stressed that his ruling is narrowly tailored. Rather than blocking the policy nationwide, the injunction applies only to the 14 plaintiffs before the court. He found that maintaining their existing placements would not adversely affect public safety or the operation of the federal prison system. The Advocate contacted the Bureau of Prisons on Monday seeking comment on the ruling, asking whether the agency intends to comply with the order, whether it plans to appeal, and how transgender women are currently being housed within the federal prison system. The agency did not immediately respond. Attorneys representing the women hailed the decision as a major victory. "This ruling could not be more consequential," Jennifer Levi , senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, said in a statement. "The women protected by this order face the most horrific consequences imaginable if transferred: violence, sexual assault, and grave harm to their physical safety and well-being." Shannon Minter , legal director of the National Center for LGBTQ Rights , said the ruling reaffirmed that government officials cannot ignore documented threats to incarcerated people's safety. "This decision reaffirms a bedrock constitutional principle: the government cannot knowingly place people in grave danger and simply look the other way," Minter said in a statement. Related : Federal officials force transgender women into men’s prisons despite judge’s ruling against Trump’s order The ruling arrives amid a growing body of litigation over the administration’s treatment of transgender people in federal custody. Lamberth addressed a separate federal case out of Texas in which a judge recently ordered prison officials to segregate transgender women from cisgender women at the Federal Medical Center Carswell. Four of the plaintiffs in the Washington case are housed there. Lamberth said the two rulings do not conflict because his order merely prevents the plaintiffs from being transferred to men's prisons and does not require prison officials to house transgender women alongside cisgender women or permit access to shared spaces. “These women have the right to serve their sentences without being subjected to assault, and the court has rightly held that the law requires the government to assess and respond to the real dangers they face—not look the other way,” Minter said.
Go to News Site
New York Post 
Chicago Tribune 
