The legal debate over inclusion
The Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday on whether state bans preventing transgender and non-binary students from participating in female-only public school sports are constitutional. These cases, coming from Idaho and West Virginia, were struck down in lower courts, but the states are appealing.
The cases could have broad implications beyond sports, potentially affecting access to bathrooms, gender markers on official documents, and other LGBTQ+ rights issues. The Trump Justice Department has voiced support for the state laws and will argue their federal impact during the hearings.
The students involved
In Idaho, Lindsay Hecox, a 24-year-old Boise State University student, initially challenged the state law but now seeks to dismiss her case to avoid further harassment. She plans to graduate this spring and will no longer compete in women’s sports in Idaho.
In West Virginia, 15-year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson (B.P.J.) wants to compete on girls’ middle and high school teams. She has identified as female since third grade and takes puberty-blocking medication. Pepper-Jackson has faced harassment related to her lawsuit, though some classmates have accused her of intimidation when trying to compete.
States defend their laws
Idaho and West Virginia are among roughly 30 states that have enacted laws preventing transgender students who identify as female from playing on girls’ sports teams. Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act passed in 2020, followed by West Virginia’s Save Women’s Sports Act in 2021. Both states argue the laws protect fairness in athletics and provide safety for students.
Supporters of these laws point to physical differences between males and females and argue that allowing transgender girls on female teams could give unfair advantages in competitive or contact sports.
Arguments from the other side
LGBTQ+ advocates and the ACLU, representing Pepper-Jackson and Hecox, argue the laws are discriminatory. They note that many schools and athletic organizations successfully balance inclusion with fairness. Pepper-Jackson said she only wanted to compete, make friends, and enjoy teamwork, but her rights have been politicized.
The court’s history
The Supreme Court has a mixed record on transgender rights. In 2020, a 6-3 majority ruled that Title VII protections cover transgender employees. Yet last year, the court upheld Tennessee’s restriction on certain medical treatments for transgender minors, emphasizing judicial restraint and leaving policy decisions to elected representatives.
Legal experts suggest the justices may issue a narrow ruling specific to school sports, avoiding sweeping statements that could affect broader civil rights issues.
What’s next
The cases, Little v. Hecox from Idaho and West Virginia v. B.P.J., could set precedents on how Title IX applies to transgender students in sports. The Supreme Court is expected to issue final rulings by late June, potentially shaping the balance between inclusion, fairness, and state authority in education.
