By Mark Sherman | Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed likely to uphold state laws barring transgender girls and women from playing on school athletic teams.
Lower courts ruled for the transgender athletes in Idaho and West Virginia who challenged the state bans, but the conservative-dominated Supreme Court gave no indication after more than three hours of arguments that it would follow suit.
RELATED: Justice Department sues California over transgender student athletes
Instead, at least five of the six conservatives on the nine-member court indicated they would rule that the laws don’t violate either the Constitution or the landmark Title IX law, which prohibits discrimination in education and has produced dramatic growth in girls and women’s sports.
In just the past year, the justices ruled in favor state bans on gender-affirming care for transgender youths and allowed multiple restrictions on transgender people to be enforced.
The legal fight is playing out amid a broad effort by President Donald Trump to target transgender Americans, beginning on the first day of his second term and including the ouster of transgender people from the military and declaring that gender is immutable and determined at birth.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who coached his daughters in girls basketball, seemed concerned about a ruling that might undo the effects of the Title IX federal law. Kavanaugh called Title IX an “amazing” and “inspiring” success. Some girls and women might lose a medal in a competition with transgender athletes, which Kavanaugh called a harm “we can’t sweep aside.”
The three liberal justices seemed focused on trying to marshal a court majority in support of a narrow ruling that would allow the individual transgender athletes involved in the cases to be allowed to compete.
-
Protesters wave transgender pride flags outside the Supreme Court as it hears arguments over state laws barring transgender girls and women from playing on school athletic teams, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)
1 of 5
Protesters wave transgender pride flags outside the Supreme Court as it hears arguments over state laws barring transgender girls and women from playing on school athletic teams, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)
Expand
The culture war cases come from Idaho and West Virginia, among the first of the more than two dozen Republican-led states that have banned transgender athletes from girls and women’s teams.
The justices are evaluating claims of sex discrimination lodged by transgender people versus the need for fair competition for women and girls, the main argument made by the states.
The transgender athletes’ cases
In the first case, Lindsay Hecox, 25, sued over Idaho’s first-in-the-nation ban for the chance to try out for the women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University in Idaho. She didn’t make either squad because “she was too slow,” her lawyer, Kathleen Hartnett, told the court Tuesday, but she competed in club-level soccer and running.
Becky Pepper-Jackson, a 15-year-old high school sophomore, has been taking puberty-blocking medication, publicly identified as a girl since age 8 and has been issued a West Virginia birth certificate recognizing her as female. She is the only transgender person who has sought to compete in girls sports in West Virginia.
Pepper-Jackson has progressed from a back-of-the-pack cross-country runner in middle school to a statewide third-place finish in the discus in just her first year of high school.
Prominent women in sports have weighed in on both sides. Tennis champion Martina Navratilova, swimmers Summer Sanders and Donna de Varona and beach volleyball player Kerri Walsh-Jennings are supporting the state bans. Soccer stars Megan Rapinoe and Becky Sauerbrunn and basketball players Sue Bird and Breanna Stewart back the transgender athletes.
The high-court arguments had been expected to focus on whether the sports bans violate the Constitution or Title IX.
In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled LGBTQ people are protected by a landmark federal civil rights law that prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace, finding that “sex plays an unmistakable role” in employers’ decisions to punish transgender people for traits and behavior they otherwise tolerate.
But last year, the six conservative justices declined to apply the same sort of analysis when they upheld state bans on gender-affirming care for transgender minors.
Chief Justice John Roberts signaled Tuesday he sees differences between the 2020 case, in which he supported the claims of discrimination, and the current dispute.
The states supporting the prohibitions on transgender athletes argue there is no reason to extend the ruling barring workplace discrimination to Title IX, which dramatically increased opportunities for girls and women in school sports.
Lawyers for Pepper-Jackson argue that the law protects people like their client from discrimination. They are asking for a ruling that would apply to the unique circumstances of her early transition. In Hecox’s case, her lawyers want the court to dismiss the case because she has forsworn trying to play on women’s teams.
Despite the small numbers of transgender athletes, the issue has taken on outsize importance. The NCAA and the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committees banned transgender women from women’s sports after Trump, a Republican, signed an executive order aimed at barring their participation.
The public generally is supportive of the limits. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in October 2025 found that about 6 in 10 U.S. adults “strongly” or “somewhat” favored requiring transgender children and teenagers to only compete on sports teams that match the sex they were assigned at birth, not the gender they identify with, while about 2 in 10 were “strongly” or “somewhat” opposed and about one-quarter did not have an opinion.
About 2.1 million adults, or 0.8%, and 724,000 people age 13 to 17, or 3.3%, identify as transgender in the U.S., according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law.
A decision is expected by early summer.
Leave a Reply