Oral arguments have begun in the US supreme court hearing on state laws banning trans girls from girls sports teams.
Oral arguments center on two cases of trans students who sued over the Republican-backed laws in Idaho and West Virginia prohibiting them from participating in girls athletic programs. The cases could have far-reaching implications for civil rights, with a ruling against the athletes potentially eroding a range of protections for trans youth and LGBTQ+ people more broadly.
The arguments started with Idaho. In Little v Hecox, Lindsay Hecox, a trans college student pursuing track, sued to overturn Idaho’s first-in-the-nation 2020 law categorically banning trans women and girls from women’s sports teams. She has since pushed to have the case dismissed, saying she is not doing sports in college and doesn’t want further harassment, but the supreme court is still hearing the matter.
“Idaho’s law classifies on the basis of sex, because sex is what matters in sports,” argued Alan Hurst, Idaho’s solicitor general. “It correlates strongly with countless athletic advantages, like size, muscle mass, bone mass and heart and lung capacity.”
In West Virginia v BPJ, 15-year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson challenged the state’s 2021 law banning her from track. A federal court blocked the ban, but the state appealed to the supreme court.
Twenty-seven states have now restricted trans youth access to school sports – most with laws targeting trans girls, but some applying to all trans youth. Defenders of the bans argue they are promoting fairness and safety in women’s sports, while trans rights advocates counter the laws are cruel and discriminatory, and that there’s no credible evidence inclusive sports policies have endangered cis girls and women.
The laws are aimed at excluding a tiny fraction of the population, with GOP legislators at times unable to identify any trans girls playing sports in their states, and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) president testifying he was aware of fewer than 10 trans college athletes.
Lawyers for the trans students, including the American Civil Liberties Union, argue the bans violate the equal protection clause of the constitution. In the West Virginia case, attorneys argue the ban also violates Title IX, a federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in schools. The states are supported by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal group behind major anti-LGBTQ+ cases and anti-abortion efforts.
The court will consider whether the laws are discriminatory and merit “heightened scrutiny”, a rigorous review where the government has a higher burden to justify the bans. If the court’s conservative supermajority decides the bans don’t warrant heightened scrutiny, it could set a precedent that anti-trans laws are “presumptively constitutional”, the ACLU has warned.
If the court rules trans people are not covered by Title IX, it could boost policies meant to ban trans students’ bathroom access and ability to use chosen pronouns and names, and leave LGBTQ+ youth with fewer protections against harassment, bullying and discrimination.
Pepper-Jackson said in a statement last week that she plays sports to “make friends, have fun, and challenge myself through practice and teamwork”, adding: “All I’ve ever wanted was the same opportunities as my peers. But in 2021, politicians in my state passed a law banning me – the only transgender student athlete in the entire state – from playing as who I really am. This is unfair to me and every transgender kid who just wants the freedom to be themselves.”
