The United States Supreme Court has ruled that states can bar transgender women and girls from competing in female sports at public schools and colleges, handing supporters of the restrictions a major legal victory in one of the country’s most contentious culture war debates.
- +US Supreme Court backs ban on transgender women in female school sports
In a decision split along ideological lines, the court held that state laws in Idaho and West Virginia allowing participation based on a person’s sex recorded at birth do not violate the Constitution or the federal civil rights law known as Title IX.
In a decision split along ideological lines, the court held that state laws in Idaho and West Virginia allowing participation based on a person’s sex recorded at birth do not violate the Constitution or the federal civil rights law known as Title IX.
The ruling is expected to strengthen similar laws already in force across more than two dozen states and gives state governments broad authority to set eligibility rules for women’s and girls’ sports.
Writing for the six member conservative majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the court’s decision reflected the law rather than a broader political judgment.
«”The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America,” Kavanaugh wrote.»
The three liberal justices disagreed with the constitutional analysis. In a partial dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that the court had weakened equal protection guarantees for transgender students.
«”The majority applies a diminished view of equal protection,” Sotomayor wrote.»
The case combined challenges to laws passed in Idaho and West Virginia. The Idaho lawsuit was brought by Lindsay Hecox, a transgender long distance runner, shortly after the state enacted its ban in 2020. Lower courts had temporarily blocked the law, finding that the state had not shown enough evidence that the measure was necessary to protect fairness in women’s sports.
Idaho lawmaker Barbara Ehardt, who sponsored the legislation, defended the measure at the time, saying it would ensure that “boys and men will not be able to take the place of girls and women in sports because it’s not fair.”
Supporters of the bans argue that biological males retain physical advantages in areas such as strength, speed and endurance, making competition unfair for athletes born female. The issue gained national prominence during Donald Trump, United States president’s 2024 election campaign, and his administration later signed an executive order seeking to exclude transgender women from female sports teams. The NCAA subsequently adopted a policy preventing transgender women from competing in women’s college sports.
The debate has also reached international sport. Earlier this year, the International Olympic Committee said a review of scientific evidence found a “clear consensus” that male biology provides a performance advantage in sports that depend on strength, power and endurance.
Opponents of the restrictions maintain that the laws unfairly target transgender students and argue that the scientific evidence is more complex than supporters claim. They say blanket bans deny transgender athletes equal opportunities to participate in school sports.
The Supreme Court’s decision is likely to shape future legal battles over transgender rights, while reinforcing the power of states to determine who can compete in women’s and girls’ sporting events.
