Listen to the article
The Supreme Court appeared poised on Tuesday to uphold state laws prohibiting transgender girls and women from participating in school sports teams that align with their gender identity, potentially delivering another setback to transgender rights in America.
During more than three hours of arguments, the court’s conservative majority signaled it was likely to rule that bans in Idaho and West Virginia do not violate either the Constitution or Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education. The case represents the latest in a series of legal challenges involving transgender rights to reach the nation’s highest court.
More than two dozen Republican-led states have enacted similar prohibitions on transgender female athletes in recent years. The legal battle is unfolding against the backdrop of broader political tensions surrounding transgender rights, including President Donald Trump’s recent executive actions targeting transgender Americans, such as removing them from military service and declaring that gender is determined at birth.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who has coached his daughters in basketball, expressed concern about potential rulings that might undermine Title IX’s legacy, which he characterized as “amazing” and “inspiring” in expanding opportunities for women and girls in sports. He noted that some female athletes might lose medals in competitions with transgender participants, describing it as a harm that “we can’t sweep aside.”
The court’s three liberal justices appeared to focus on crafting a narrow ruling that would allow the individual transgender athletes involved in the cases to prevail without creating broader precedent.
The cases center on Lindsay Hecox, 25, who challenged Idaho’s first-in-the-nation ban for a chance to try out for women’s track and cross-country at Boise State University, and Becky Pepper-Jackson, a 15-year-old high school sophomore in West Virginia. Pepper-Jackson has been taking puberty-blocking medication, has identified as a girl since age 8, and has been issued a West Virginia birth certificate recognizing her as female. She is reportedly the only transgender person who has sought to compete in girls’ sports in West Virginia.
Pepper-Jackson’s performance as an athlete has evolved from being at the back of the pack in middle school cross-country to achieving a statewide third-place finish in discus during her first year of high school.
The cases have drawn attention from prominent sports figures on both sides. Tennis champion Martina Navratilova, swimmers Summer Sanders and Donna de Varona, and volleyball player Kerri Walsh-Jennings support the state bans. Meanwhile, soccer stars Megan Rapinoe and Becky Sauerbrunn, along with basketball players Sue Bird and Breanna Stewart, back the transgender athletes.
In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that LGBTQ people are protected by federal civil rights laws prohibiting workplace sex discrimination. However, last year, the six conservative justices declined to apply similar reasoning when upholding state bans on gender-affirming care for transgender minors. Chief Justice John Roberts indicated Tuesday that he sees meaningful differences between those earlier cases and the current disputes.
Idaho’s Solicitor General Alan Hurst argued that the state’s law is “necessary for fair competition because, where sports are concerned, men and women are obviously not the same.” Lawyers for Pepper-Jackson countered that while such distinctions generally make sense, their client has none of the alleged advantages due to her early transition.
Despite the intense political focus on transgender athletes, NCAA president Charlie Baker told Congress in 2024 that he was aware of only 10 transgender athletes among more than a half-million students on college teams. Both the NCAA and the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committees have banned transgender women from women’s sports following Trump’s executive order.
Public opinion generally supports restrictions. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in October 2025 found that about 60% of U.S. adults favor requiring transgender children and teenagers to compete only on sports teams matching their birth-assigned sex, while approximately 20% oppose such requirements.
According to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, about 2.1 million adults (0.8%) and 724,000 people aged 13-17 (3.3%) identify as transgender in the United States.
A decision from the Supreme Court is expected by early summer, potentially establishing a nationwide precedent on this contentious issue at the intersection of sports, education policy, and civil rights.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
10 Comments
A complex and sensitive issue that doesn’t have any easy answers. I hope the court can provide clarity and guidance, while respecting the rights and concerns of all involved.
Do you think this case could set an important precedent for how transgender rights are balanced against other considerations in the sports context?
As someone interested in sports and equality, I’m closely following this case. It highlights the need for nuanced policies that address the complexities around transgender participation.
What do you think are the key factors the court should weigh in reaching its decision?
This is a challenging and divisive topic. I hope the court can find a balanced approach that respects the rights and concerns of all parties involved.
Do you think there are any potential compromise solutions that could work here, or is this an issue where the court may have to choose between competing interests?
Interesting case with complex issues around fairness and inclusion in women’s sports. Looking forward to seeing how the Supreme Court weighs the arguments and reaches a decision.
Curious to hear more perspectives on this case and how it may impact transgender athletes and women’s sports going forward.
Glad to see this important issue getting a thorough review by the Supreme Court. Their decision will have significant implications for the future of women’s sports.
This case touches on important issues of fairness, inclusion, and women’s rights. I’m curious to see how the Supreme Court navigates these tricky waters.