BUZZ
‘The term “sex” in Title IX … cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex,’ justices rule
States may ban male athletes who identify as female from women’s and girls’ sports, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in a 6-3 decision that conservatives hailed as a “massive” victory.
The ruling, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, upheld Idaho and West Virginia laws that prohibit men who identify as transgender from competing in girls’ sports. Conflicting lower court rulings on the constitutionality of the laws prompted the Supreme Court to take the case last year.
“The term ‘sex’ in Title IX, the Javits Amendment, and the Title IX regulations cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex,” the ruling states. “The ordinary meaning of the term ‘sex’ at the time of enactment in the early 1970s was biological sex and not gender identity, particularly in the sports context.”
The court rejected arguments by transgender athletes “that schools must make an exception to that general rule for biological males who identify as female and have taken puberty blockers or hormones.”
“Separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable: Given the inherent physical differences between the sexes, allowing only biological females to play on women’s and girls’ teams can reduce the risk of physical injury and ensure fair competition,” Kavanaugh wrote for the majority.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Jackson.
Reacting on X, Claremont Institute fellow John Eastman said he was surprised to see the liberal justices’ concurrence.
“Wow. Didn’t have ‘unanimous result’ on my Bingo Card for the transgender in women’s sports cases. But on the key statutory question, whether Title IX requires states to allow biological men who identify as women into women sports, the Court is unanimous,” the retired Chapman University law professor wrote.
Lawyer Ed Whelan also pointed out that “the term ‘transgender girl’ appears nowhere in Kavanaugh’s opinion. The term ‘biological male’ appears dozens of times.”
Meanwhile, conservative and women’s sports leaders hailed the ruling as a victory for women and girls across America.
“Breaking!! A #SaveWomensSports victory at U. S. Supreme Court!!! Female Athletes all over Texas and America are celebrating!!” Jonathan Saenz, president of Texas Values, wrote on X.
Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins also celebrated the ruling as a victory for girls like her daughter, calling it “common sense” that “biological boys cannot compete alongside or against” her.
Randall Wenger, chief counsel at the Independence Law Center in Pennsylvania, described it as a “decisive win for equal opportunity for women and girls.”
“For too long, schools have been pressured to accept the lie that recognizing biological sex is discriminatory. But this ruling sends an important message to school districts across the country: policies recognizing biological sex in athletics are lawful, constitutional, and consistent with longstanding American legal principles,” Wenger said in an emailed statement.
Beth Parlato, senior legal counsel for the Independent Women’s Law Center, emphasized the significance of the ruling for matters beyond athletics as well.
“The Supreme Court’s decision will shape far more than athletic competition,” Parlato stated in a news release ahead of the ruling. “I believe these cases present a foundational question about whether the law will continue to recognize women as a distinct class entitled to sex-based protections—a principle that underlies Title IX.”
The question at the center of the case was this: “Whether laws that seek to protect women’s and girls’ sports by limiting participation to women and girls based on sex violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment,” according to SCOTUS Blog.
The Idaho case involved a male athlete, Lindsay Hecox, who identifies as a woman and wanted to run cross country for Boise State University’s women’s cross-country team.
The American Civil Liberties Union sued Idaho on behalf of Hecox in 2020, claiming its ban on male athletes competing in women’s sports is “hateful” and “unconstitutional.”
As The College Fix previously reported, “Hecox’s case is centered on whether the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits biological distinctions in sports. A similar case, West Virginia v. B.P.J. addresses this question and also looks at if Title IX prohibits states from having sex-segregated sports.”
Alliance Defending Freedom acted as co-counsel in both cases, arguing that women’s and girls’ sports should be separate.
MORE: ACLU tries to stop its own transgender athlete Supreme Court case
