Since returning to office, President Donald Trump has signed more than 100 executive orders, including one that aims to block transgender people from serving in the military, because the administration believes anyone who lives as a gender other than the one assigned at birth is not living "an honorable" lifestyle.

If the administration is successful in implementing this policy, as many as 4,200 transgender people could be forced to leave the U.S. military. But one active-duty military member an Army reservist Lt. Nic Talbott decided to challenge the president in court.

For Talbott, being a soldier had been a goal for a long time.

"If you'd asked me when I was a little kid what I wanted to be when I grew up, this is it," Talbott told Scripps News. "I wanted to be an American soldier."

But achieving that childhood dream became harder than any child could've imagined. That's because Talbott who grew up on a farm in Ohio was actually born a girl.

"It took me almost nine years to be able to enlist in the United States military," he said.

IN RELATED NEWS | Talbott v. Trump: Plaintiff makes case for transgender troops in the military

Reality started to sink in after high school graduation. As a transgender man, Talbott was caught in the middle of ever-changing political policies that first blocked transgender people from serving, then allowed, and then threatened to shut the doors once again.

"I would start to make progress with one recruiter, and something would happen with the policy, and I would have to stop pursuing that path and look for another door that might have been open for me," said Talbott.

"When you finally got that call, take us in the room. What was it like," legal affairs correspondent, Ava-joye Burnett asked.

Talbott, who conducted a virtual interview with Burnett, became visibly emotional.

"Sorry, I'm still a little emotional when I talk about it, because it was, you know, such a pivotal moment," said Talbott. "Nine years of build-up for him to tell me that he was not calling with bad news. I mean, it was just so overwhelming."

Once back in the White House, President Trump signed an executive order directed at banning transgender people from serving in the military.

The order read 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..."

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT | Supreme Court allows Trump's ban on transgender troops to take effect

"What was your reaction when you read that particular line?" Burnett asked.

"I was certainly surprised by some of the language used in the executive order this time around," said Talbott. "When we put on that uniform and we show up to do our job as soldiers, all that matters is that we can meet the standards and do our jobs. And those of us who are in the service have already proven that we can."

Research organizations, such as the UCLA School of Law Williams Institute, say there are about 15,000 transgender people in the military. But the Department of Defense says that number is closer to 4,200.

A recent AP-NORC poll says about 26% of Americans oppose allowing transgender people to serve in the military. But 37% favor allowing transgender people to serve.

Andrew Flores is a political scientist who's an assistant professor at American University, as well as a visiting scholar at UCLA School of Law Williams Institute. Flores studies transgender issues and believes most Americans are in favor of on-the-job protection for transgender people in the military.

"Why is it that we see that overarching support that hasn't really dwindled over a decade or so?" Burnett asked.

"Part of the American fabric is to have to embrace equality, right? And equality, in terms of jobs and access is kind of one of the more paramount same values that individuals have, right, and so this broad - this support has been pretty broad, and has been pretty broad for, like you said, like a decade, if not longer," said Flores.

"You mentioned that people start to bristle when you home-in on specific categories," said Burnett. "What are some of those categories? And why is it that we start to see that breakdown?"

"If you even look at today's debates around transgender rights, a lot of it is centering on youth and kids right, youth in sports, but also transgender youth and their ability to access, say, gender affirming care," said Flores. "So, there's all this stuff that's really entangled with, say, children as one component that makes people kind of have a second thought."

In January, just 10 days before President Trump was inaugurated for the second time, Lt. Talbott was commissioned from officer candidate school. But those celebrations were short-lived because Talbott has sued President Trump in an attempt to block the administration from banning transgender people from serving.

A decision in that case is now pending in a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C.

"What will it feel like if you lose something that you've worked so long and hard for?" Burnett asked Talbott.

"The battles recently have not been going favorably, or, you know, not been going the way we would like them to. But looking at the big picture, I still have a lot of hope, and I still have a lot of faith that even if I am separated from the military in the short term, eventually, we will be successful," said Talbott.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Trump administration in a separate case Shilling v. United States as the administration moved to ban transgender people from serving in the military. But the case involving Talbott continues to work its way through the federal court system.

The Department of Defense is currently allowing transgender members to go through voluntary or involuntary separation from the military. Lt. Talbott has decided to take the involuntary route, which means he will not leave willingly.

That will force his higher-ups to make a determination that Talbott is unfit to serve despite his military achievements and that's when he could ultimately be separated from the military.

With less than two weeks left in its term, the Supreme Court has numerous major cases still to rule on.

One of the most anticipated cases remaining on the court's calendar concerns birthright citizenship. This case, which has generated significant public misunderstanding, traces back to the first day of President Donald Trumps second term when he signed an executive order to prohibit birthright citizenship for children born to undocumented migrants on U.S. soil.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT | Supreme Court lets Trump end humanitarian parole for 500,000 people from 4 countries

Traditionally, children born in the U.S. are granted citizenship, regardless of their parents' immigration status. But following Trumps executive order, lawsuits arose to challenge its validity, leading this particular case to reach the Supreme Court through the emergency docket.

This case, however, is not asking the justices to consider the constitutionality of Trumps authority to enforce his executive order; instead, they will determine whether lower courts can intervene and prevent the president from exercising his proclaimed rights. This presents a complex legal issue that may leave some questions unanswered regarding the citizenship status of children born to undocumented migrants.

In addition to the birthright citizenship case, about 16 other cases await judgment, with several designated as major. One such case from Texas addresses online pornography.

IN RELATED NEWS | Supreme Court upholds Tennessee law barring gender-affirming care for transgender minors

The Texas attorney general is seeking to impose age verification requirements for accessing adult content to prevent minors from viewing it. However, critics from the adult entertainment sector argue that these measures could infringe on freedom of speech and discourage online activity due to privacy concerns.

Another significant case arises from Maryland, involving a school district's curriculum. Parents in Montgomery County want to exempt their children from reading materials related to same-sex relationships, claiming it conflicts with their religious beliefs.

The school district contends that merely being exposed to such content does not constitute indoctrination. Justice arguments revealed a divide, with liberal justices questioning where the exclusion might end, while conservatives pointed out that alternative opt-out options already exist in other districts.

As the Supreme Court approaches its final stretch, it faces a daunting list of cases, though extensions are still possible, as seen in previous terms.

This story was initially reported by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy.

The federal government is seeking to revisit several immigration cases involving college students previously detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for alleged involvement in pro-Palestinian activism on university campuses, Scripps News has learned.

Officials have begun contacting various court systems to explore possible appeals in cases where students were released from ICE custody. Among them are several high-profile scholars who remain under scrutiny despite rulings in their favor.

Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish national and doctoral student at Tufts University, was released after two separate courts ruled in her favor. The government is now asking an appeals court to review those decisions.

RELATED STORY | Turkish student at Tufts University detained, video shows masked people handcuffing her

Georgetown scholar Khan Suri is also the subject of renewed legal interest. He was accused of spreading pro-Hamas propaganda and promoting antisemitism on social media. The government is asking an appeals court to reexamine the case, which could lead to his return to detention.

Another prominent case involves Mohsen Mahdawi. Unlike the others, Mahdawi is a permanent U.S. resident. He was released from custody and graduated from Columbia on Monday.

Rather than being in prison in Vermont or Louisiana, I come here to celebrate with my fellow students, my brothers and sisters, my professors, and my community in New York City, Mahdawi.

RELATED STORY | Judge releases Columbia student arrested at US citizenship interview

Mahdawi also called attention to the case of Mahmoud Khalil, a graduate student at Columbia who was taken into custody in front of his pregnant wife. Khalil is currently being held in a detention center in Louisiana.

His case is proceeding on two legal tracks. In federal court, his attorneys are seeking his release. In immigration court, however, a judge has already ruled that Khalil should be deported. His legal team is racing to overturn that decision.