Aven Thomas began medically transitioning from female to male in 2021, just months after then-President Joe Biden signed an executive order^[1] allowing transgender people to serve openly in the U.S. military.

The result was so gratifying for the U.S. Army^[2] specialist that he compared it to turning on a light in pitch darkness. "When you feel at your best," he added, "you are able to perform your best."

Stationed at Fort Eisenhower^[3] in Augusta, Thomas is now quitting the military under pressure from the Trump administration, which has reversed^[4] Biden's policy.

About 1,000 service members who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria like Thomas are voluntarily leaving the military under President Donald Trump's policy, the U.S. Defense Department announced^[5] this month.

The Trump administration also announced^[6] this month that it is preparing to begin the next phase of its ban by "involuntarily separating" transgender service members who have not stepped forward like Thomas. The Pentagon has estimated about 4,000 -- or less than 1% of the roughly 2 million people in uniform -- have a diagnosis for gender dysphoria.

"I am really glad that I got to serve. I love all the people that I have met," said Thomas, 25, a seven-year Army veteran who reenlisted for another five years in February. "It is going to be hard to let go, especially not on my own terms."

A History of Controversy

Americans are sharply divided over allowing openly transgender people to serve in the U.S. military. Fifty-eight percent favor it, while 35% oppose it and 7% have no opinion, according to a telephone poll^[7] of 1,001 adults Gallup conducted nationwide in late January. Support is higher among Democrats at 84%, compared to Republicans at 23%.

Trump reignited the debate in 2017 during his first presidential administration, when he moved to ban transgender people from the U.S. military.

"Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail," Trump announced then on Twitter, the social media platform now known as X.

Federal judges blocked Trump's policy. After he defeated Trump and took office in January 2021, Biden overturned Trump's ban.

Soon after Trump moved back into the White House this year, he signed an executive order revoking Biden's policy. Trump's order says in part: "adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual's sex conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life."

Seven transgender service members joined a transgender person who wanted to enlist and the Gender Justice League in suing in federal court, arguing Trump's latest ban is unconstitutional. In March, a federal district court judge in Tacoma, Washington, blocked Trump's order. But on May 6, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled^[8] Trump could proceed with his ban.

On the same day of the high court's ruling, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth championed the Trump administration's policies while speaking at an annual conference for Special Operations Forces.

"We are leaving wokeness and weakness behind," Hegseth said^[9]. "No more pronouns. No more climate change obsession. No more emergency vaccine mandates. No more dudes in dresses, we're done with that [expletive]."

'We Are Losing a Good One'

The son of a high school band director and a property manager, Thomas was born and raised in Douglas, the Coffee County government seat. While attending elementary school in rural Georgia, he knew he was "different."

"Being from a small country town, I felt weird," he said.

As Thomas grew older and traveled outside of rural Georgia, he learned more about people like him. When he reached 17, he decided he wanted to undergo gender transition.

Meanwhile, Thomas was inspired by relatives who served in the military. He joined the Army after he graduated from high school and now serves as a training equipment manager with a detachment of the 73rd Ordnance Battalion.

He has participated in training exercises in Germany and Poland. And he received Army Achievement Medals in 2021 and 2024 for "exceptionally meritorious service" and for "outstanding achievement," respectively, his service records show.

Staff Sgt. Mariytzah Gillis, who serves in the same Army battalion at Fort Eisenhower with Thomas, has been impressed with his work ethic and resilience. Thomas has performed, Gillis said, above his rank and has taken on extra responsibilities.

"Thomas is an amazing soldier," Gillis said. "We are losing a good one because people don't like them? It doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't make sense to Thomas. It doesn't make sense to anybody but Trump."

Fort Eisenhower and the Defense Department referred questions about Thomas' case to the U.S. Army, which did not respond to requests for comment.

The Defense Department also said it would not provide information about how many other military service members like Thomas who are voluntarily leaving the military are stationed in each state, including Georgia.

Thomas received his gender dysphoria diagnosis from the military in September 2021 before proceeding with his medical transition the following month.

He decided to voluntarily resign this year, partly because he knew it was possible the Trump administration could access his military medical records and force him out.

"If they were to continue with involuntary separations, you wouldn't have to do a whole lot of digging to find that. That is definitely the reason why I self-identified," he said.

"I just don't want to be forced out under someone else's terms," he added. "If it were up to me, I would like to stay in."

Service members with a gender dysphoria diagnosis who leave voluntarily like Thomas will be honorably discharged and be eligible for separation pay^[10] that is twice as high as those who are involuntarily forced out, according to the Defense Department^[11].

Thomas hasn't decided how he will support himself after he leaves the Army, though he wonders if he could do a similar job as a civilian at Fort Eisenhower.

"I was someone who wanted to continue serving my country for 20 years," he said. "That was my plan. It has always been my plan to continue my service for as long as possible because I really do enjoy what I do. I always have."

Thomas emphasized that he rejects the Trump administration's ban, saying he and other transgender people have served successfully in the military for many years.

"We can perform our duties just like any other soldier," he said. "We are more than capable. We are more than qualified."

© 2025 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Visit at ajc.com^[12].

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.^[13]

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered immediate changes to address a multitude of problems this year with domestic military permanent change of station^[1] moves under the Global Household Goods Contract, or GHC.

In a memo Tuesday to senior leaders and combatant commanders^[2], Hegseth announced that he has ordered U.S. Transportation Command to address what he called "recent deficiencies" in performance by HomeSafe Alliance, the company that manages the $7.2 billion contract to run the department's moving process.

Military families with PCS^[3] orders this year have reported numerous issues with scheduling and executing moves^[4], such as packers who don't show up, delayed pickups and deliveries, and cancellations.

Read Next: GOP's 'Big Beautiful' Bill with $8.5 Billion for Military Quality-of-Life Boost Passes House^[5]

Hegseth outlined six steps Transportation Command will take to better support military personnel and their families when they move.

"Relocating our personnel is critical to the military mission, putting human resources and expertise where they are needed to defend the nation," Hegseth wrote.

According to the memo, Transportation Command must immediately hold HomeSafe Alliance, as well as the legacy system, known as Tender of Service, accountable in meeting performance benchmarks, providing weekly updates to senior Pentagon acquisition and personnel leadership.

The command also must make sure that the GHC is fully operational and, where it falls short, moves should be transferred to the legacy program. The contract, which has been in the works for years, was designed to privatize management of troops' household goods shipments during moves -- and solve widespread dissatisfaction among military families over the handling of the shipments by Transportation Command and the military.

Transportation Command must review the rates it pays to HomeSafe under the contract, and "if appropriate, implement economic price adjustments" to raise the rates, which have been criticized by industry officials as not competitive with market rates.

And, most important to military families who prefer to execute moves themselves, Hegseth increased the rate the Defense Department will pay service members to move themselves -- a "personally procured move^[6]" -- to up to 130% of what HomeSafe is currently supposed to receive if the company performed the move.

"As I have determined that the current GHC rates fail to reflect market rates and are in excess of 130% of current GHC rates, implement adjustments to the government constructed costs for reimbursement of personally procured moves from May 15, 2025, through September 30, 2025," Hegseth wrote.

HomeSafe Alliance won the household goods contract in 2021 following a series of protests over the award by other bidders^[7]. Under the contract, the entire moving process, from scheduling, packing, pickup and delivery, is supposed to be managed by the private company.

HomeSafe Alliance conducted test moves last year, and this year was supposed to handle the majority of the domestic moves. According to the publication Federal News Network, however, just 25% of domestic moves had been assigned to GHC by April^[8] and, of those, 1,600 were turned back over to the legacy system because HomeSafe couldn't handle the capacity.

The DoD oversees roughly 400,000 household goods shipments each year -- 15% of all moves in the U.S.

In a statement to Military.com, HomeSafe Alliance officials said they were grateful for the directive, adding that it will "greatly improve moving experiences for military service members and their families."

"DoD raising our rates to account for significant inflation from the last four years would substantially benefit our ability to facilitate world-class moving services for our nation's heroes," the company said in a statement.

But Dan Hilton, executive director of the American Trucking Associations' Moving and Storage Conference, expressed continued reservations over the contract, which replaced a program that "continues to work well with service members."

"We remain concerned over the GHC contractor's unpreparedness, due to lack of industry engagement in its program, to handle any meaningful volume during this peak season. It's been the experience of our members that the traditional ToS capacity has been unable to adequately plan for peak season due to the GHC contractor's failed implementation," Hilton said in a statement Wednesday.

Megan Harless, an Army^[9] veteran and military spouse^[10] who has become an advocate for military families undergoing PCS moves, called the memo and the increases for do-it-yourself moves "a step in the right direction."

"It's what we've been asking for since January. This, accountability and transparency," Harless said in a statement on her LinkedIn page.

As part of the order, Hegseth also created a PCS Task Force to review the process and make recommendations for improving, expanding, transferring or terminating the contract or responsibilities of HomeSafe or the legacy system.

In their statement, HomeSafe officials said they "look forward to working" with the task force to show how their program modernizes the move process and "resolves decades-long issues with military relocations."

As part of the ongoing concerns with the PCS process, Transportation Command also relieved Andy Dawson, director of the Defense Personal Property Management Office, this week. He has been temporarily replaced by Army Maj. Gen. Lance Curtis.

Hegseth said that the measures will help ensure that "our warriors and their families receive the best PCS move available."

"The department owes them nothing less, and getting this right is part of restoring their trust in our military," he wrote.

Related: Army Pulls Back Household Goods Shipments as Privatized Moving Contract Leads to Widespread Issues^[11]

A plan to inject $8.5 billion into military quality-of-life initiatives overcame a key hurdle early Thursday morning as House Republicans narrowly approved a sweeping bill to enact President Donald Trump's legislative agenda.

The quality-of-life funding is part of $150 billion for the Defense Department that Republicans included in what they are officially calling the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a wide-ranging legislative package that touches everything from taxes to health care to border policy.

The Pentagon funding could provide a much-needed boost to barracks maintenance, military health care and other areas that directly affect the well-being of service members. But military and veterans advocates have expressed concerns about other aspects of the bill, particularly cuts to a federal food benefits program and the repeal of a rule that restrains for-profit colleges from targeting veterans.

Read Next: Marine Sergeant Sentenced to Confinement, Dishonorable Discharge and Reduction in Rank for Lejeune Killing^[1]

The bill must still pass the Senate, where there will almost certainly be further changes to win over some Republicans skeptical about various aspects, including the food assistance cuts. But the House passage -- which came in a party-line 215-214 vote at about 6 a.m. Thursday -- is a key milestone in the process.

"Without this generational investment in national defense, we will no longer be able to deter our adversaries or ensure America's global leadership," House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., said in a statement after the vote. "The One Big Beautiful Bill provides long overdue resources to modernize our military, revitalize the defense industrial base and improve the quality of life for our service members."

The two biggest pots of Pentagon funding in the bill are $34 billion for shipbuilding and $25 billion for the Golden Dome, which is Trump's proposal^[2] for a space-based missile defense shield^[3] over the U.S.

Of the $8.5 billion that would go toward military quality-of-life issues, $1.3 billion is devoted to barracks maintenance and restoration across the military services.

The military has faced years of problems with squalid living conditions for its most junior troops, and military officials have often blamed persistent underfunding of housing for the issue.

In addition to the barracks funding, the bill would also provide temporary authorization for more widespread barracks privatization, an idea that has gained steam in recent years^[4] as the services have struggled with maintenance backlogs.

A recent analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, estimated^[5] that the two barracks privatization-related provisions in the bill could increase government spending by about $2 billion over 10 years.

Apart from barracks, the quality-of-life funding in the bill includes $2 billion for defense health programs, which have faced shortages in recent years^[6]. There is also $2.9 billion for Basic Allowance for Housing^[7] payments, $50 million for special pay and bonuses, $100 million for child-care fee assistance for service members, and $10 million for military spouse^[8] professional licensure fee assistance.

Elsewhere in the bill, a food assistance program that many military families rely on is facing steep cuts^[9].

Under the bill, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which is often referred to as food stamps, would receive less federal funding, and states would be required to make up the difference.

Anti-hunger and military families advocates, as well as governors^[10] and other state officials^[11] across the country^[12], have been warning that states will not be able to handle the extra budget burden and will need to cut benefits, restrict eligibility or, in the worst-case scenario, stop offering SNAP in the state altogether. Since military families are among SNAP beneficiaries, they would undoubtedly be swept up in the cuts, advocates say.

The White House is pushing back on the idea that military families would be affected by the SNAP cuts.

"President Trump is strengthening SNAP for Americans who need it -- especially military families -- to ensure these programs are sustainable for future generations," White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement Tuesday.

Senate Republicans have reacted tepidly to the state cost-sharing plan for SNAP. In a statement last week, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman, R-Ark., said the Senate "will carefully consider the House's approach," while stopping short of endorsing it.

Republicans are using a process known as reconciliation that will allow them to pass the bill in the Senate with a simple majority, rather than the 60 votes needed for most legislation. That means they won't need any Democratic votes, but they will still have to overcome any intra-party disputes.

Veterans organizations are also hoping senators will make changes to the education policy portion of the bill. In particular, they are sounding the alarm^[13] about the fact the bill would repeal what's known as the 90/10 rule, which limits how much of a for-profit school's revenue can come from federal student aid.

A loophole in the rule that allowed shady for-profit schools to take advantage of veterans' GI Bill^[14] benefits was closed in 2023. But advocates are warning that repealing the rule altogether could lead to for-profit schools once again scamming veterans out of their education benefits.

Republicans have argued the rule unfairly targets for-profit colleges and that repealing it would expand educational opportunities by treating all types of schools the same.

"President Trump's One, Big, Beautiful Bill is great for our veterans and military families," Kelly, the White House spokesperson, added in a statement Thursday. "By delivering the largest tax cut for middle and working-class Americans in history, ensuring greater educational choices for veterans and strengthening SNAP, this president is dedicated to delivering on his campaign promises and ensuring our men and women in uniform have the support they need."

A CBO estimate released last week^[15] said that repealing the 90/10 rule could increase federal spending by $1.6 billion, including increasing veterans education benefits costs by about $25 million.

Since Senate Republicans were instrumental in the bipartisan deal that closed the loophole in the 90/10 rule, veterans advocates are leaning on them now to keep the rule alive.

"This cannot and should not be allowed to be included in the final bill, and IAVA and the veterans you see here today will fight tooth and nail to make sure it does not happen," Allison Jaslow, CEO of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said at a news conference last week. "I can tell you that there are members of the majority in the Senate who are watching this closely and aren't liking what they're seeing. They're just not saying so publicly yet."

Related: Republicans Unveil Pentagon Portion of Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' with Extra Money for Barracks^[16]