Supreme Court Signals Support for Women’s Sports Rules

Clear Facts

• The Supreme Court is considering whether states can maintain laws that keep men out of women’s sports.
• Justices showed skepticism toward claims that such laws violate the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX.
• Some justices questioned lawyers for not clearly defining the term ‘sex.’

The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday over laws in West Virginia and Idaho that restrict women’s sports to biological females. Most justices appeared to support the state laws after lengthy questioning.

Transgender-identifying athletes challenged the laws, arguing they break constitutional protections, but the justices were doubtful of those claims. The discussion also centered on the definition of sex for legal purposes.

Justice Samuel Alito pressed an attorney, “Is it not necessary for there to be, for Equal Protection purposes, if that is challenged under the Equal Protection Clause, an understanding of what it means to be a boy or a girl or a man or a woman?”

Kathleen Hartnett, representing a transgender-identifying male athlete, responded, “We do not have a definition for the court, and we don’t take issue with the … we’re not disputing the definition here. What we’re saying is that the way it applies in practice is to exclude birth sex males categorically from women’s teams, and that there’s a subset of those birth sex males where it doesn’t make sense to do so, according to the state’s own interest.”

Alito followed up with, “How can a court determine whether there’s discrimination on the basis of sex without knowing what sex means for Equal Protection purposes?” He further questioned if concerns from female athletes about fairness made them bigots.

Chief Justice John Roberts expressed similar doubts, stating, “Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. It’s a statutory term, it must mean something. You’re arguing here there is discrimination on the basis of sex, and how can we decide that question without knowing what sex means in Title IX?”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned if the high court should intervene, pointing out that states differ on the issue. “Why would we, at this point, just the role of this court, jump in and try to constitutionalize the rule for the whole country while [there’s] still, as you say, uncertainty, debate — while there are still strong interests on the other side?” he said.

Kavanaugh emphasized that sports are “zero-sum game” and that one transgender-identifying athlete could have a major impact on women’s teams.

Attorney John Bursch commented after the arguments that this issue should be decided nationwide to protect fair competition for women across all states.

Demonstrators held competing rallies outside the court. A supporter of women’s sports rights traveled from North Carolina to participate, highlighting the importance of the matter to everyday Americans.

Stay informed on this crucial issue defending the integrity of women’s sports and traditional values.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Read more at The Daily Wire