The US Supreme Court has ruled that states have the authority to bar transgender women from competing in female sports at public schools and colleges, a landmark decision that upholds laws enacted in Idaho and West Virginia.
The ruling follows legal challenges filed by transgender students who argued that the state laws violated the US Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause as well as Title IX, the federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in educational institutions receiving federal funding.
In its decision, the Supreme Court unanimously concluded that the state laws do not conflict with Title IX. However, the justices were divided over the constitutional question. The court’s six conservative justices held that the restrictions do not violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, while the three liberal justices disagreed with that interpretation.
Writing for the majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh stated that neither the US Constitution nor Title IX requires states to change the structure of women’s and girls’ sports across the country.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a partial dissent, criticized the ruling, arguing that the majority had adopted what she described as a narrower interpretation of equal protection under the Constitution.
One of the cases before the court originated in Idaho, where transgender athlete Lindsay Hecox challenged the state’s 2020 law shortly after it was passed. Earlier court rulings had temporarily blocked the legislation, with an appeals court previously finding that Idaho had not demonstrated the ban was necessary to preserve fairness in women’s sports.
The Idaho law was sponsored by state legislator Barbara Ehardt, who said the legislation was designed to prevent biological males from competing in female sports, arguing that doing so protects fairness for girls and women. Since Idaho became the first state to introduce such restrictions in 2020, more than two dozen US states have enacted or proposed similar measures.
The debate over transgender participation in women’s sports became a major political issue during President Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. After returning to the White House, Trump signed an executive order aimed at preventing transgender women from participating in female sports. The move was later followed by the NCAA, which announced that transgender women would no longer be eligible to compete in women’s collegiate sports.
Supporters of the restrictions argue that transgender women may retain physical advantages associated with male puberty, particularly in sports that depend on strength, speed and endurance, making separate female competitions necessary to ensure fairness.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has also announced plans to limit women’s Olympic events to biological females. According to the IOC, its review of available scientific evidence found that male biology provides performance advantages in sports that rely on strength, power and endurance.
Opponents of the bans, however, maintain that the restrictions discriminate against transgender students and argue that scientific research does not support a single conclusion about competitive advantage in every sport or individual circumstance.
The Supreme Court’s decision is expected to influence future legal challenges involving transgender athletes and could reinforce similar laws already adopted by several states across the United States.
