The 31st MEU, made up of approximately 2,200 service members, arrived at White Beach Naval Facility, Okinawa, Japan, after a six-month deployment to the U.S. 5th Fleet and 7th Fleet areas of operations. There, the ARG-MEU helped to enforce a U.S. Navy blockade along the Strait of Hormuz.

“The team adapted, never lost sight of the mission, and performed flawlessly under the most dynamic circumstances,” U.S. Marine Corps Col. Chris Niedziocha, commanding officer of the 31st MEU, said in a statement.

The Tripoli ARG includes America-class amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli, San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ship USS New Orleans and Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship USS Rushmore.

The Tripoli ARG and 31st MEU deployed from the Tripoli’s homeport in Sasebo, Japan, in early March and arrived in the U.S. Central Command area of operations on March 27.

Prior to participating in Operation Epic Fury, the ARG-MEU participated in Exercise Iron Fist 26 alongside Japanese Self-Defense Forces.

Sailors and Marines helped transport 800,000 pounds of cargo, conducted more than 1,600 hours of combat aviation missions without an accident and refueled more than 300 aircraft ashore and underway.

During the first Navy blockade, which began April 13 and ended June 18, U.S. military forces redirected over 140 compliant ships and disabled nine non-compliant ships.

The blockade ended briefly after the U.S. and Iran signed a 60-day interim Memorandum of Understanding to pause military operations as peace talks were underway, but the U.S. renewed the blockade on July 14 after a ceasefire between both sides failed.

As troops look toward a future when their service might be welcome once again, individuals affected by the policy told Military Times that the year and a half time period upended their lives.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in a June 1 ruling regarding Talbott v. USA that the Pentagon’s transgender military ban was unconstitutional and that the 30 enlisted plaintiffs involved in the case could continue to serve.

That ruling, which upheld an earlier preliminary injunction and is set to go into effect July 16, applied only to those plaintiffs.

Shortly after, on July 1, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a motion to certify Talbott v. USA as a class action lawsuit, meaning the protections would extend to all transgender service members enlisted in the military.

But not yet.

Before more than the 30 can rejoin, the certification must be complete and the district court must extend the preliminary injunction to the class. The timing of those actions remained uncertain Wednesday.

The U.S. government can fight the ruling and attempt to stall it by petitioning for a rehearing or asking the Supreme Court to intervene, but as of Wednesday, neither have happened.

Transgender civilians looking to enlist are still barred from joining the military.

Cast out

Though transgender troops were optimistic after the June 1 ruling about the future of their service, their path to get right back where they started — being allowed to do their jobs — was grueling.

Military Times spoke with 10 transgender service members who described how the forced separation process and the ensuing administrative leave pipeline pushed them into a perilous mental space.

With their lives on hold, these service members felt depression, anxiety and disillusionment over why an institution to which they had pledged their lives suddenly cast them out, swiftly and seemingly without regard for their psychiatric and professional well-being.

Service members also felt betrayed that the Defense Department used their “gender dysphoria” diagnosis to justify their separation. The term was assigned to service members during previous administrations as a medical diagnosis that allowed them to serve openly as transgender and receive gender-affirming care.

The DoD declined in an email to Military Times to comment on the situation.

Life in limbo

In 2025, after 15 years of service, one transgender U.S. Navy lieutenant was envisioning full retirement, a deserved pension and the health benefits that came along with it.

Just five more years.

Instead, they found themselves at the psychiatric ward at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center after checking themself in for suicidal ideation, something they said was abnormal for them.

Eventually, they regained their footing, but the effects were lasting.

“My mental health has just been a dumpster fire,” said the lieutenant, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intimate psychological struggles. “This trans ban has made me a completely different person.”

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, that paved the way for the ousting of any transgender service members with a history of “gender dysphoria.”

Sweeping DoD policy followed shortly thereafter, with service members given the opportunity to either apply for voluntary separation — which incentivized service members through bonus pay to leave on their own accord — or wait for likely involuntary separation through the new policy.

A Feb. 26, 2025, Pentagon memo said that troops with a history of gender dysphoria have medical, surgical and mental health constraints “incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”

Service members saw it as a thinly veiled attempt to get rid of them.

Some transgender service members — the Pentagon has declined to say how many — were placed on administrative “absence,” or Permissive Temporary Assigned Duty (PTAD).

The administrative leave process, which had no precedent in the military for medical conditions, paid service members to not work and barred them from serving while they awaited their separation date.

The lieutenant was able to medically retire on May 22 after their mental health decline triggered a medical board review that deemed them eligible. They spent 16 years in the Navy, just four shy of the 20 they had aspired to serve.

Petty Officer Second Class Jaylen Joubert, a sailor who served about three years, said he was denied administrative leave altogether.

Joubert’s gender dysphoria diagnosis was given to him in October 2024, and his gender-affirming care was set to begin in February 2025. The transgender military ban executive order halted the process.

After expressing frustration to his commanding officer for being denied PTAD, he said he was involuntarily separated on April 17, 2026, due to conditions not amounting to a disability, but related to mental health and mental turmoil.

A loss of direction

Senior Master Sgt. Jamie Hash joined the military to be a part of something bigger than herself.

In 2025, with 13 years in the U.S. Air Force already under her belt, she had planned to serve at least 20 years and retire. So when Trump rolled out the ban and DoD policy ensued, she decided to reject the voluntary separation process and fight to remain.

“I don’t want to leave based on something that’s not specific to my performance or capability,” Hash said.

She has been on administrative leave since June 2025, and the leave has impacted her professional goals.

Hash had been awarded a prestigious three-year legislative fellowship in summer 2024 that allowed her to work as a liaison between the Defense Department and Congress, but the opportunity was jeopardized with the ban.

Though technically enrolled in the fellowship program, she wasn’t allowed to show up and take advantage of any its resources or perform any duties during her forced leave.

This loss of direction and purpose was commonplace for many.

For Master Sgt. Sabrina Bruce, who served in the Air Force for eight years and the Space Force for four, the military provided a second lease on life, as well as a support network that made her feel whole.

She’d realized her worth. But now that community was gone.

“Joining the military was the best thing that ever happened to me,” said Bruce. “Before the military, no one saw potential in me.”

Depression and suicidal thoughts plagued her for several months during the administrative leave process, which finally ended in December 2025 when she officially voluntarily separated.

Army Maj. Erica Vandal, who separated on Jan. 1, after nearly 15 years of service, described the administrative leave process as a “state of limbo.”

Vandal said she was still figuring out who she was as a person outside of the military. She was currently filling the void with advocacy work, she said, and continuing to search for something that fulfilled a sense of purpose similar to what the military offered.

Nicolas Talbott, the lead plaintiff in Talbott v. USA — the high-profile case challenging the ban — joined the Army National Guard in March 2024 and commissioned as a second lieutenant.

It took him nearly a decade to enlist after legal battles and the shifting policies of different presidential administrations, including both of Trump’s.

Talbott told Military Times that serving his country was the best job he’d ever had, combining every field of study he was passionate about: national security, counter terrorism and high-stakes environments that require precise decisions.

But after serving less than one year, his future in the military was once again cast into doubt.

“Stuck in a constant state of limbo has become the norm for me,” Talbott said.

The process wasn’t only grating for his mental health, but difficult for those around him too, including family members. They’d witnessed him work hard for everything he’d gotten, and then they watched as he found himself in what they viewed as an unfair situation.

Grooming, uniform standards

Several service members described administrative leaves and separation processes that felt designed to disrespect and humiliate them, as it barred them from donning the uniform they’d worn since their transitions.

The military made them adhere to the grooming standards of their gender assigned at birth during retirement ceremonies and graduations from prestigious military schools, they said.

U.S. Space Force Col. Bree Fram officially retired on Dec. 31, 2025, after serving for nearly 23 years. She opted to voluntarily separate once she realized the Trump administration would no longer allow her to serve.

Fram was the first openly serving transgender service member to be promoted to the rank of colonel. Despite the momentous achievement, she wasn’t allowed to wear her uniform during her retirement ceremony on Jan. 8, 2026.

Inexplicably, the DoD changed her military records on Dec. 1, 2025, to reflect her gender assigned at birth, not her actual gender, Fram said. Had she walked across the stage in the female uniform she’d been wearing for years, she would’ve been brought up on charges because it would now violate Uniform Code of Military Justice regulations barring opposite-gender uniforms.

Instead, she wore a business suit.

“These were the uniforms that we bled into, that we sweat into, that we were denied even that small dignity of wearing,” Fram said.

Her service dress uniform and boots were placed on a table off to the side as she walked across the stage.

About two weeks before her gender was denied publicly, she dealt with what she said was another slight. She was summoned to the Pentagon by a lieutenant general deputy chief of space operations.

In the meeting, which lasted 15 minutes, the lieutenant general told Fram that the official support she’d requested for her retirement ceremony — which included an honor guard and a band, both very common for ceremonies — would not be granted because there were concerns it would have the appearance of being political.

The officer then reminded Fram that she was still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which Fram found unusual.

“I took this very much as a warning or a veiled threat, to be be silent, to not talk about these things,” Fram said.

Army Infantry Major Kara Corcoran has served for over 18 years and is currently involved in the involuntary separation process.

In May 2025, she graduated from the School of Advanced Military Studies after completing an esteemed one-year master’s degree program that trained her to become an operational planner.

But she was informed by her chain of command that senior leadership had prohibited her from crossing the stage with her peers during graduation unless she adhered to male regulations and standards, in keeping with the new DoD policy.

“Cruelty was the point,” Corcoran said of the rule.

She was given an option to have a separate ceremony, or just be given her diploma instead.

She borrowed an old friend’s male uniform, cut her long hair into a pixie cut the day before the graduation ceremony and walked across the stage.

“You’re not gonna take away something I’ve earned,” Corcoran said. “If you think that cutting my hair is going to affect my identity, you don’t understand the strength and resilience of transgender service members.”

Bait and switch

Nearly all of the transgender service members who spoke to Military Times transitioned after joining the military, but in order to begin gender-affirming care, they had to receive a diagnosis of “gender dysphoria” from a doctor.

Gender dysphoria is defined by the Mayo Clinic as a “feeling of distress that can happen when a person’s gender identity differs from the sex assigned at birth.” But the clinic also notes that while some transgender people experience gender dysphoria, others feel comfortable with their bodies and gender identities.

“Not all transgender or gender diverse people experience gender dysphoria,” the clinic says.

The diagnosis was now being used to cast out transgender troops.

Many of the service members who spoke to Military Times said they either never had gender dysphoria but agreed to the diagnosis as a way to receive gender-affirming care, or they had experienced the feeling in the past but had not after transitioning.

Using the diagnosis against them was an unfair bait and switch, many said.

Staff Sgt. Athena N. Knight served in the U.S. Marine Corps for 14 years and opted for voluntary separation. She was honorably discharged on June 30, 2026.

Knight said she never had clinical gender dysphoria and didn’t meet the criteria for the ban.

“I don’t have gender dysphoria, I’m just transgender,” Knight said.

She was given the diagnosis under Defense Department Instruction 1300.28 “In-Service Transition for Transgender Service Members,” but explained it was because it provided the only path to receive necessary gender-affirming care.

The difference was similar to the distinction between someone being depressed and clinically depressed, Knight said. They’re not the same.

Someone could experience symptoms of gender dysphoria and not have clinical gender dysphoria.

Using gender dysphoria to expel someone from the military not only confused the service members it affected, but it also didn’t make sense legally, advocates said.

“There’s not one other medical condition that results in automatic discharge from the military,” said Shannon Minter, who works for the National Center for Lesbian Rights and is the lead attorney in the Talbott v. USA case.

Master Sgt. Logan Ireland, who’s served for 15 years in the Air Force, said he’s never felt dysphoric about his gender.

But based off DoD policy under the Trump administration, he faced separation despite wanting to continue serving.

Ireland initially applied for retirement after the Air Force extended the possibility of early retirement for transgender service members with 15 to 18 years of service.

He received retirement orders from the Air Force in June. But then, several months later, the Air Force issued a memorandum saying his application for early retirement was denied. Voluntary separation was offered, but Ireland didn’t want it at that point.

He is suing the Trump administration with other service members from the Air Force and Space Force over what they say is a loss of early retirement benefits.

“I had to get the diagnosis of gender dysphoria in order to continue serving in the military authentically as male,” Ireland said. “So for me it was a checkbox.”

Even though he had the diagnosis, it was easily curable through hormones and living as his authentic self, which he said he was doing.

“I’m a male,” Ireland said. “I live happily, healthfully as a male. There’s zero issue with me having a gender dysphoria diagnosis in a past medical history, because it’s already been corrected.”

Question of return

The Talbott v. USA ruling is set to go into effect Thursday, but if the class action is certified, it remains unclear what the protections mean for service members who voluntarily separated but want to return now that the ban was ruled unconstitutional.

Regardless, transgender troops have expressed mixed feelings about returning to an organization that rejected their service to their country.

“I don’t think I’ll get back in uniform unless something drastic happens,” Knight said.

She expressed concern about having to return the money she was given by the military as an incentive to voluntarily separate. She also wasn’t sure about going through a potentially complicated reenlistment procedure, given the disability rating she received upon exiting the service.

The Navy lieutenant who sought help at Walter Reed said they didn’t want to rejoin the military after it turned its back on them. But at the same time, serving another four years would get them to 20 and allow them to receive a significant upgrade in retirement benefits.

As of last week, they were considering all their options.

Corcoran was unequivocal in her commitment to returning — if given the chance.

“I want to finish out my 20 years and do my job, and be able to be a productive teammate,” Corcoran said. “The whole point of why I joined the military was to serve my country.”

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a motion to certify Talbott v. USA as a class action lawsuit several weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in a June 1 ruling that the Pentagon’s transgender military ban was unlawful.

The June ruling only allowed the plaintiffs in that case to continue serving, meaning all other transgender service members are currently still banned from the military. But if the class action lawsuit goes into effect in two weeks along with the June ruling, the protections won in Talbott v. USA would extend to all transgender service members currently serving.

“The protection afforded to our plaintiffs should be available to all transgender servicemembers and their families,” said National Center for LGBTQ Rights Legal Director Shannon Minter. “We know that this ban is discriminatory, rooted in animus, and irrationally excludes highly decorated servicemembers who have deployed around the world and given everything to our country.”

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, stating that service members with a history of “gender dysphoria” have medical, surgical and mental health constraints “incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”

Transgender troops previously needed a gender dysphoria diagnosis in order to receive gender affirming care while in the military and, as a result, many transgender service members have the term in their medical record.

Approximately 4,240 transgender individuals are serving in the military have a gender dysphoria diagnosis, both on active duty and in the reserves, according to an Associated Press report.

The Defense Department rolled out a sweeping “voluntary separation” policy last February that attempted to incentivize transgender military service members to separate from the military by offering more money than they’d otherwise receive for involuntary separation.

Service members who Military Times spoke to at the time said the move was anything but voluntary, as they wanted to continue to serve and saw the policy as a way to kick them out.

Transgender service members have either been voluntarily or involuntarily separated or are in the process of being separated, with some on paid administrative leave.

The National Center for LGBTQ Rights and GLAD Law filed a lawsuit against Trump on Jan. 28, 2025, alleging that the ban was unconstitutional because the policy was based on animus.

The lawsuit eventually shifted so that the plaintiffs were suing the U.S. government.

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a nationwide preliminary injunction on March 18, 2025, blocking the discharge of transgender service members, which the newly enacted Defense Department policy called for.

The U.S. government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which ultimately ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor over a year later on June 1, 2026.

The government has 45 days after the June 1 ruling to file a petition for rehearing.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit can either accept or deny that request.

The government can also ask the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to rehear the case, which would comprise 11 active judges, as opposed to a three-judge panel, like the one that decided the June 1 ruling.

If the government went that route, the ruling of that rehearing would go into effect seven days after the decision.

The Trump administration could also ask the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an emergency stay to stop the preliminary injunction and class action lawsuit from going into effect.

The government hasn’t filed as of Wednesday.

Lance Cpl. Armando Ortiz Canseco, 21, was serving aboard the amphibious transport dock ship USS Anchorage during training between the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit and Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group when he disappeared.

“On behalf of the Marines and sailors of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit, I extend our deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of Lance Cpl. Ortiz Canseco,” Col. Richard Alvarez, the commanding officer of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit, said. “He earned the title of United States Marine and served his country with honor and commitment.”

The U.S. Navy began a search and rescue mission on Thursday but shifted to search and recovery operations on Friday, signaling the likely possibility that he had died.

The search and rescue efforts encompassed assets from the Navy, Coast Guard and Air Force and traversed 2,400 square miles over 43 hours with three surface ships and 12 aircraft.

Canseco, originally from Minnesota, enlisted in the Marine Corps on April 3, 2023.

He was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, at Camp Pendleton, California, before transferring to 2nd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment.

The circumstances surrounding his death are currently under investigation, the service said.

The incident was reported at 11:30 a.m. Eastern Standard Time while the ship was moored at Naval Station Mayport, Florida. Mayport Fire and Emergency Services responded to the scene immediately and extinguished the fire.

“The cause of the incident is being reviewed,” a Navy spokesperson said.

The service members were released shortly after arriving at local hospitals and cleared to return to the Indianapolis the same day.

Earlier this month, a fire broke out aboard the John Lewis-class fleet oiler USNS Harriet Tubman, which is under construction at the General Dynamics NASSCO shipyard in San Diego, California.

The fire was doused with limited damage and no injuries reported.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office released a report in May that said the U.S. Navy needs to do a better of job of mitigating fire risks for ships during maintenance periods.

Between May 2008 and July 2020, there were 15 major fire incidents aboard Navy ships, thirteen of which occurred on those undergoing maintenance.

The jet, assigned to Marine Aircraft Group 11, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, was conducting a routine training exercise when it crashed, the service confirmed.

“The cause of the mishap is currently under investigation,” the Marine Corps said.

The Yakima County Sheriff’s Office received calls around 12:15 p.m. involving a military plane that crashed into a mountain in the area of Rimrock Lake.

A law enforcement officer responded to the scene and helped transport a pilot who’d ejected from the jet to a hospital, where he recovered from minor injuries.

A wildfire was reported in the area shortly after, requiring intervention from the Naches Fire Department, which deployed a helicopter in tandem with the U.S. Forest Service in Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest to subdue the flames.

Local enforcement evacuated campers in the area after the fire broke out.

The 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing would not confirm that the aviation mishap was the cause of the fire.

The Defense Department released data in November 2025 that showed a sizable uptick in aviation mishaps.

The rate of significant accidents per 100,000 flight hours rose 55% in fiscal 2024 in comparison with the four years that preceded it.

Two years ago, Washington state was the site of another tragic military mishap.

In October 2024, two Navy pilots died when their EA-18G Growler crashed east of Mount Rainier.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation on Friday arrested former U.S. Navy Seaman Bareen Dzayee, 25, along with Bisaam Ghafoor, 21, and Elias Shamsaldeen, 21, for allegedly providing over $2,000 to an individual they believed to be an ISIS member.

The trio reportedly believed their money would sanction the purchase of rocket-propelled grenades and drones that would be used to murder U.S. service members.

“Over years, the individuals communicated about several plans to support ISIS, including through the provision of personnel, services and money,” a criminal complaint read. “Through chats, voice calls and multiple messaging platforms, these conspirators pledged allegiance or ‘Bayat’ to ISIS and its leader.”

Dzayee enlisted in the Navy in 2021 and served aboard the USS John McCain from March 25, 2022, to July 19, 2024, when he separated from the service.

Between March 2025 and January 2026, the FBI identified all three suspects as ISIS sympathizers after alarming social media posts.

The posts pledged allegiance to the terrorist organization, promoted violence and discussed weapons and explosives in support of ISIS operations.

A confidential FBI source the suspects believed to be an active ISIS member reached out to Ghafoor and Shamsaldeen in May 2025 and joined a social media group chat in which Shamsaldeen specifically stated his desire to injure U.S. service members, travel overseas to fight for ISIS and “take action” to make his fantasies of violence come true.

Ghafoor, Dzayee and Shamsaldee paid money between March and May of this year to the confidential FBI source. At one point, Ghafoor said it would be “sick” if the contact — who was the FBI agent — wrote Ghafoor’s name on one of the drones.

During the process of sending money to the FBI source, Ghafoor acknowledged that doing so would be treason but stated that he wanted to continue with the transaction, according to the Justice Department.

He also reportedly told the confidential source that he had fantasized about killing a female soldier by beheading and wanted to kill 300,000 Americans.

“For years, the Department of Justice has been encouraging Americans that if they see suspicious activity, they should report it to law enforcement,” U.S. Attorney Ryan A. Kriegshauser for the District of Kansas said in a DoJ release. “That’s because long gone are the days where terrorist threats and attacks are incidents that only take place far away on foreign soil.”

Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit boarded the M/T Celestial Sea as it traveled in the Gulf of Oman, potentially toward an Iranian port. They searched the ship and forced it to alter its course in adherence with the blockade, according to U.S. Central Command.

“U.S. forces continue to fully enforce the blockade and have now redirected 91 commercial ships to ensure compliance,” CENTCOM said.

U.S. military forces have also disabled four vessels since the U.S. Navy blockade began on April 12.

A U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet from USS George H.W. Bush launched “precision munitions” at the smokestacks of two Iranian-flagged unladed oil tankers on May 8 as they transited toward an Iranian port in violation of the U.S. Navy blockade.

That same week, U.S. military forces destroyed six Iranian small boats that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched toward Navy vessels escorting ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

And on May 6, a U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet from the USS Abraham Lincoln fired on the Iranian-flagged unladen oil tanker M/T Hasna in the Strait of Hormuz as it attempted to evade the blockade after several warnings from the U.S. Navy.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump signaled a willingness to continue military strikes against Iran if diplomatic talks between both nations continued to stall, amid an ongoing ceasefire and a possible peace agreement.

The meteoric rise of the service’s autonomous weapons stockpile was a result of a clear edict from the top down and service member adaptability, according to Commanding Officer of the Weapons Training Battalion Col. Scott Cuomo, who spoke at the Modern Day Marine exposition in Washington.

“Rewind your brain to October,” Cuomo said. “We had zero FPV attack drones in the United States. We have over 3,500 right now.”

First-person view drones allow operators to watch a live feed through either goggles or a screen that provide visuals from the drone’s vantage point. Many weigh several pounds, can carry explosives and travel close to 100 mph.

Once the top brass signaled the service’s shift toward modernizing its unmanned strike capabilities, the Marine Corps responded swiftly, ramping up the service’s development and utilization of FPVs.

In January 2025, Commanding Generals of Training Command Maj. Gen. Anthony M. Henderson and Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory Brig. Gen. Simon M. Doran launched the Marine Corps Attack Drone Team, recognizing the necessity of first-person view drones after the proliferation of the technology during the war in Ukraine.

The strides came with the blessing of Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith, a vocal proponent of getting FPV drones into the hands of Marines quickly.

The team, based out of Marine Corps Base Quantico, works in lockstep with the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory to integrate the drones into the Fleet Marine Force.

Part of the integration includes increasing troops’ proficiency with the technologies through Marine Corps attack drone competitions.

Marines from 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment, 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force, participated in the first attack drone competition in Okinawa, Japan, from Dec. 3 to 12, 2025.

By August 2025, the service issued an official 90-page handbook providing instructions on how to properly employ drones against adversaries.

Most recently, Marines with the 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment operated drones as part of the Marine Corps Attack Drone Competition at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, in March 2026.

Over a two-week period, the team trained and certified U.S. Marines as drone operators, attack drone instructors and payload specialist instructors, according to a Marine Corps X post.

And during a live-fire event on April 27 at Exercise Balikatan in the Philippines, the Marine Corps conducted the first FPV attack drone strike that joint forces have executed in that part of the world, Cuomo said.

The Pentagon issued a call to defense industry executives in December 2025 to help it acquire and deploy over 300,000 small one-way attack drones by 2028 as part of a $1 billion initiative. The Marine Corps announced shortly after that it was launching six drone training programs open to any MOS.

Cuomo likened the service’s quick adoption and mastery of drone technology to a previous skill challenge it faced.

“The Marine Corps was not very good at marksmanship at the turn of the 20th century,” Cuomo said. “So what did our ninth commandant do? He created the Marine Corps Shooting Team. And now we all know the Marine Corps is … really good at shooting.”

U.S. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith told audience members at Modern Day Marine in Washington on Thursday that the demand for ARG-MEUs has exceeded the 3.0 presence he previously called for.

“I won’t say how many of the ARG-MEUs our combat commanders asked for, but it is well north of three,” he said. “Like double that.”

Calls for ARG-MEUs are coming from the U.S. military’s Southern Command, European Command, U.S. Central Command and U.S. Africa Command.

A 3.0 presence indicates a three-ship ARG-MEU deployed at all times: one out of the East Coast, one out of the West Coast and the 31st MEU delivering periodic deployments out of Okinawa, Japan.

Currently, the 22nd MEU is participating in Operation Southern Spear and the 31st MEU is in the Middle East in support of Operation Epic Fury.

The 11th MEU is reportedly en route toward the Middle East to support Operation Epic Fury, but as of this week was conducting routine patrols around the southern Philippines.

Smith labeled ARG-MEUs the most flexible tool in the Defense Department inventory, providing humanitarian assistance, non-combatant evacuation operations and key strike capabilities.

The ARG-MEUs in recent years have been more relevant than ever before, Smith added, but sustaining the pace proved difficult. This struggle emphasized the Marine Corps’ and Navy’s need to return to a permanent 3.0 ARG-MEU presence.

“This is our number one priority and it remains my personal north star as a commandant,” Smith said.

The Navy’s current inventory of amphibious ships, however, is not enough to address this goal, according to Smith.

The Navy holds an inventory of 32 amphibious warfare ships, but half of the fleet is in poor condition and poorly maintained, according to a 2024 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

A defense official told Military Times in August 2025 that the readiness rate of amphibious ships had dropped to 41% despite the Marine Corps previously stating that the amphibious readiness rate needed to remain at 80% or higher to complete missions.

To remedy the ongoing issue, the Marine Corps is focusing on optimizing maintenance schedules, investing in service life extensions and procuring new ships.

Expeditionary Warfare Director Brig. Gen. Lee Meyer told reporters Tuesday at the Modern Day Marine exposition that the Navy recently completed a study on Wasp-class amphibious assault ships, which led to the service life extension of the USS Wasp.

Meyer said the Navy and Marine Corps would also study other amphibious assault ships to see if they could extend their lifespan, with the services expecting a completed study of amphibious dock landing ships in the next several days.

The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps recently partnered to launch the Amphibious Force Readiness Board, which will seek to tackle the best pathway forward to maintain, modernize and build the service’s amphibious fleet to prioritize availability.

The board wasn’t a study group, according to Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, who spoke at Modern Day Marine Thursday. It was a platform to produce action, he said.

“Far too long amphibious readiness has absorbed the cumulative effects of aging systems, deferred maintenance, supply chain, friction, workforce shortages and high operational tempo,” said Caudle. “So, we are attacking the problem directly.”