On Oct. 9, U.S. Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) joined 24 other Senate Democrats in voting for the National Defense Authorization Act, which was passed by the Senate in a 77-20 vote.
This vote has sparked criticism on numerous fronts, since the bill contains provisions targeting transgender service members and is set to reduce diversity, equity and inclusion programs in the military.
The NDAA authorizes funding and sets policy priorities for the Department of Defense and other national security programs. The Senate version of this year’s NDAA includes a $924.7 billion price tag.
The House of Representatives passed its own version of the NDAA — with a price tag of $892.6 billion — in September. Now, the two chambers will work together to develop a final version of the bill, which will be sent back through Congress for a vote before it is signed into law by the president.
Currently, the House’s version of the bill prohibits the provision of gender-affirming care for minors through the Exceptional Family Member Program, which provides medical support in specific circumstances for families of active service members.
The House version also restricts the gender options in the DoD’s data systems and surveys to just “male” and “female,” defines access to the military’s single-sex facilities along the lines of biological sex and eliminates most institutional DEI initiatives.
The Senate version, on the other hand, leaves a few legislative loopholes. Like the House’s version, the Senate’s bill bans transgender women from playing on women’s sports teams at military academies. But the Senate bill uniquely permits them to train with women’s sports teams in a limited capacity. The Senate has also kept limits on gender-affirming surgery while potentially leaving room for non-surgical and mental health-related treatment.
Steven Brown, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, wrote in an email to The Herald that “both the House and the Senate versions of the NDAA contain troubling and discriminatory provisions targeting the trans community.”
He also noted that “the Trump administration’s actions in sending National Guard troops to non-consenting states is deeply disturbing,” and that the NDAA does not place limits on this domestic deployment.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
The ACLU of R.I., Steven Brown added, is particularly concerned about the provisions limiting gender-affirming surgery and prohibiting transgender women from playing on women’s military academy sports teams.
In the wake of his vote to pass the legislation, Reed said the act “represents a strong, bipartisan commitment to ensuring our military remains focused on its core mission: defending the United States against the growing threats we face around the world.” The NDAA, Reed added, is meant to address “real national security priorities, not partisan agendas.”
Chip Unruh, a press secretary for Reed, wrote in an email to The Herald on behalf of both Whitehouse and Reed’s offices that “the bill boosts Rhode Island’s economy, strengthens national security and provides much-needed support to our servicemembers and their families.”
“Of course the senators don’t support every provision in the bipartisan bill, but they will continue working to improve it,” Unruh added.
In an interview with The Herald, Brian Dittmeier, the director of LGBTQI+ equality at the National Women’s Law Center, said the legislation prevents service personnel from having “access to the benefits that they need to support their family,” particularly for those with transgender family members.
Dittmeier referenced last year’s iteration of the NDAA, noting that it also established a ban on youth gender-affirming care. In a December 2024 press release, the Human Rights Campaign described this provision in last year’s NDAA as “the first anti-LGBTQ+ federal law enacted since the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996,” which banned federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
“Legislation should move forward without any unnecessary and discriminatory policies that would impact military families at large, as well as those that target the diversity of service members,” Dittmeier said.
The ACLU of R.I. was “disappointed” that the R.I. Senate delegation voted for the NDAA “with these discriminatory provisions retained in it,” Steven Brown wrote, “but we will now have to wait and see how the Senate and House versions of the bill get reconciled.”
He urged Rhode Islanders to “call their congressional delegation and press them to work to eliminate these discriminatory provisions from the NDAA, and to vote against it should it come back to the floor with those provisions intact.”
