Supreme Court Upholds Transgender Athlete Bans

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld West Virginia and Idaho laws barring transgender athletes from girls' and women's sports teams, ruling the measures violate neither Title IX nor the Constitution.

The court, divided largely 6-3 along ideological lines, ruled against two transgender students, Becky Pepper-Jackson and Lindsay Hecox, who had challenged the laws in West Virginia and Idaho, respectively. The consolidated cases are known as West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion, concluding that the laws violate neither the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause nor Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which bars sex discrimination in education.

"The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women's and girls' sports throughout America," Kavanaugh wrote, according to NBC News. He added that transgender girls and women who want to play sports deserve "respect" and should not be "ostracized or vilified."

What the court decided

The six conservative justices formed the majority, while the three liberal justices dissented. Writing for the court, Kavanaugh said states "may maintain women's and girls' sports for biological females" and may determine eligibility "based on biological sex."

Reports differ on the ideological split within the ruling. CBS News reported that the three liberal justices dissented on the Equal Protection Clause question but agreed with the conservatives on Title IX. The Guardian similarly reported the liberals "dissented from some parts of the judgement, but concurred with other parts."

Challengers had argued that the court's 2020 decision finding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects gay and transgender workers should apply to Title IX. Kavanaugh rejected that view, writing that the employment law and its 2020 ruling "are not relevant in this very different statutory and factual context."

Sotomayor's dissent

Justice Sonia Sotomayor read a summary of her dissent from the bench, a signal of strong disagreement. She wrote that the court "inflicts a hardship on those it disfavors without giving them the fair and full opportunity the Constitution requires to litigate their contentions."

Sotomayor argued the majority had not given adequate weight to unresolved factual questions. "In the end, to the Court, the facts do not matter, even though the consequences are serious," she wrote, referring to the transgender girl at the center of the West Virginia case.

The plaintiffs and the laws

Becky Pepper-Jackson, a high school student in West Virginia, had taken puberty-delaying medication and hormone therapy and competed in girls' cross-country, shot put and discus. Reports differ on her age, with sources describing her as 15 or 16. Her lawyers said she is the only transgender athlete seeking to compete in girls' sports in the state and that, because of her treatment, she has no biological athletic advantage.

Lindsay Hecox, a college student, had sought to compete on the women's track and cross-country teams at Boise State University before challenging Idaho's ban, which was the first such law in the nation. She has received testosterone suppression and estrogen treatments.

West Virginia enacted its Save Women's Sports Act in 2021, requiring teams to be designated by biological sex at birth. Idaho passed its law a year earlier. Lower courts had ruled in favor of both students before the Supreme Court reversed those judgments.

Reaction

President Donald Trump, whose administration supported the bans, praised the ruling on Truth Social, writing, "BIG WIN: The United States Supreme Court just RULED AGAINST MEN PLAYING IN WOMEN'S SPORTS."

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey, a Republican, said the state had "defended a simple principle most Americans instinctively understand: that women's sports exist to provide women and girls a fair opportunity to compete and succeed."

Advocacy groups decried the decision. Sarah Kate Ellis, president of GLAAD, said the ruling "creates an unnecessarily unfair playing field." Joshua Block, a senior counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union, which represented the plaintiffs, called it "a heartbreaking ruling for our clients and transgender girls like them who've asked for nothing more than the same opportunities afforded to their peers."

Although the ruling directly concerns only West Virginia and Idaho, it is likely to affect at least 25 other states with similar bans. The decision follows a string of recent Supreme Court rulings on transgender rights, including a decision last year upholding state restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors. Readers can follow related developments in our coverage of an appeals court ruling on the transgender troop ban and the court's decision to expand presidential firing power. Those weighing their own options may find our guide on when to consult an employment discrimination lawyer useful.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the vote in the transgender athlete cases?

The Supreme Court ruled largely 6-3, with the six conservative justices in the majority and the three liberal justices dissenting. Some reports note the liberal justices agreed with the majority on the Title IX question while dissenting on the Equal Protection issue.

Which cases did the Supreme Court decide?

The consolidated cases were West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, challenges to laws in West Virginia and Idaho that bar transgender athletes from girls' and women's sports teams.

Who wrote the majority opinion and the dissent?

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissent and read a summary of it from the bench.

How many states are affected by the ruling?

The decision directly concerns West Virginia and Idaho, but at least 25 other states have enacted similar bans that are likely to be affected.

Sources

Reporting compiled from court records and the cited source outlets.