More Briefs Are Filed In Support Of Landmark SCOTUS Cases That Challenge State Bans On Trans Girls And Women Student Athletes
National Women’s Law Center filed a friend-of-the-court brief in cases challenging Idaho and W. Virginia laws that “perpetuate stereotypes and discrimination against girls and women as athletically inferior.”
Featured Image: Becky Pepper-Jackson, a teenager challenging West Virginia’s ban on transgender athletes. (Billy Wolfe | ACLU photo)
The U.S. Supreme Court is diving head first into its next term, and into the national debate surrounding trans student athletes in school sports. In January, the justices will hear oral arguments for two cases that challenge state laws in Idaho and West Virginia, prohibiting trans girls and women student athletes from participating on sports teams that align with their gender identity. Both involve runners (college and secondary school) who sought to participate and enjoy team camaraderie.
On Monday, Nov. 17, the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) lent an assist to these athletes by filing a “friend-of-the-court” brief for the cases, Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B. P. J. Also known as an “amicus brief,” the document allows third parties with a strong interest in the matter to provide analysis, expertise and perspective that might help shed light on the complexities of a case.
“For decades, Title IX has transformed the landscape of education and sports by rejecting the notion that opportunity must be rationed in favor of a view that it should be available for all,” NWLC’s amicus states. “The exclusionary model Petitioners advance betrays that progress, reflecting the very attitudes that have historically privileged men’s sports and perpetuated inequality based on harmful stereotypes about girls and women… ”
Shiwali Patel, senior director of education justice at NWLC, states, “Sports bans like the ones being challenged from Idaho and West Virginia fundamentally undermine Title IX, which was created, in part, to open doors for marginalized students who had historically been left out of school sports… By picking and choosing who ‘counts’ as a woman or girl–and to exclude from sports anyone who doesn’t–we risk legitimizing discrimination through the very vehicle we once used to protect our most vulnerable from it.”
Related: Landmark Minnesota Supreme Court Decision Affirms Trans Inclusion In Sports
Democracy Forward, representing NWLC, states that research shows that sports and supporting environments are particularly helpful to trans students, as they face disproportionate amounts of discrimination and harassment.
In the amicus section entitled, “Excluding Transgender Girls and Women Playing Women’s Sports Contravenes Title IX and Discriminates Against All Girls and Women,” NWLC argues that sex-separated sports were meant to address the decades-long exclusion of girls and women based on stereotypes about their athletic abilities, and that excluding trans girls and women feeds into beliefs around “maleness” as being equated with athletic “superiority.”
Related: New IOC President Signals Transgender Women To Be Banned From Female Olympic Events
While the brief does not focus on scientific research per se, it mentions several examples of female athletes or teams prevailing over males at the high school level in mixed-sex competitions. The brief also touches on invasive sex-testing practices and scrutiny that some women and girls have experienced as a result of the spotlight on masculinity versus femininity – the result being that some athletes are being deemed “biologically suspect.” Black and brown elite athletes have been particular targets for sex verification, the amicus states.
The bottom line of the argument: “Laws barring transgender athletes invite the imposition of such scrutiny and sex testing on all girls and women who play sports.”
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the cases on January 13, 2026.
In the meantime, other heavy hitters are stepping up to participate as amici curiae advisors. Yesterday, a coalition of House and Senate Democrats also filed an amicus brief. Their concerns include categorical bans that they argue pose harm to all girls and women through harassment and policing of children’s “reproductive biology.” And PFLAG filed an amicus this week in which six transgender athletes share their personal stories about how sports have enriched their lives.
