The Supreme Court on Tuesday signaled it is likely to uphold state laws that bar transgender women and girls from competing on women’s and girls’ school sports teams, a decision that would mark a significant victory for states defending sex-based athletic categories. After nearly three and a half hours of oral arguments in cases from Idaho and West Virginia, a majority of the justices appeared inclined to let the laws stand.
[read more]
Court observers noted that the justices appointed by Democratic presidents appeared to recognize that the challengers face an uphill battle. Their questions focused largely on narrowing the scope of a potential ruling or suggesting that one of the cases might be resolved on procedural grounds rather than through a broad constitutional decision.
Idaho enacted its law in 2020, followed by West Virginia in 2021. The Idaho case was brought by Lindsay Hecox, a transgender woman who sought to try out for women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University but did not make the teams. The West Virginia case was filed on behalf of B.P.J., a transgender girl who has competed on school teams and has undergone medical treatment including puberty blockers and estrogen.
Lower courts blocked both laws. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Idaho’s statute violated the Equal Protection Clause by categorically excluding transgender women and girls and subjecting female athletes to sex verification procedures. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals similarly blocked West Virginia’s law, finding it violated Title IX by discriminating against B.P.J. on the basis of sex.
State attorneys argued that sex-based classifications in sports are justified by biological differences relevant to fairness and safety. Idaho Solicitor General Alan Hurst said the law is intended to preserve equal opportunities for women and girls, while West Virginia Solicitor General Michael Williams emphasized that separating teams by sex has long been a standard practice in school athletics.
Attorneys for the challengers argued that the Constitution and Title IX protect transgender athletes from exclusion when they do not possess the competitive advantages cited by the states. Several justices questioned whether individualized challenges should be allowed, while others, including Chief Justice John Roberts, expressed skepticism about carving out exceptions that could undermine broader sex-based distinctions in law.[/read]