Supreme Court upholds Idaho, West Virginia laws limiting female sports to biological women

WASHINGTON, D.C. (KIFI) — In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of Idaho's and West Virginia's laws allowing schools to maintain women's and girls' sports teams for biological females and determine eligibility based on biological sex.

Writing for the majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh stated that neither Title IX nor the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents schools from maintaining distinct teams for biological females, nor do they require legally mandated exceptions for transgender athletes.

The Court concludes that "separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable given the inherent physical differences between the sexes," Kavanaugh wrote. "...In virtually all competitive sports, forcing female athletes to compete against males can undermine competitive fairness. ...Allowing only biological females to play on women’s and girls’ teams can reduce the risk of physical injury and ensure fair competition."

However, in her dissenting opinion, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote, “The majority is wrong to suggest that the term ‘sex’ in Title IX “cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex. Title IX makes room for individuals to live in the gender they choose; it cares not just about sex assigned at birth but also about individuals’ ability to match (or not) their gender presentation to their gender identity.”

The ruling hung its interpretation of Title IX on the historical context of the civil rights statute. The majority opinion stated that the term "sex" cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex, adding that the ordinary meaning of the word at the time of enactment was not gender identity, particularly in the sports context.

The battle begins in Idaho

The lawsuit was filed after The Fairness in Women's Sports Act passed the Idaho Legislature in 2000, requiring only biological women to participate in women's and girls' sports.

The law was sponsored by State Rep. Barbara Ehardt, (R)-Idaho Falls, a former collegiate basketball player and Division I coach.

Challenged by Lindsey Hecox, a transgender athlete who played soccer and tried out for Division I track and cross-country, the case Little v. Hecox advanced this year to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it was combined with a similar lawsuit, West Virginia v. B.P.J.

In an exclusive interview with Local News 8, following the ruling, Ehardt said, "Title IX was upheld on a 9-0 vote. I think that's important to note. It was a 6-3 dissent on basically how equal protections may be worked. But essentially this is going to allow the states and the 27 states who've decided to protect opportunities for girls and women to continue to do that – Idaho, of course, leading the way."

The American Civil Liberties Union challenged her assertion.

"The decision we got today is a very disappointing result for transgender girls, who just want the same opportunities to participate in school sports that cisgender girls have at the same time. It's a narrow, disappointing result," said ACLU LGBTQ & HIV Projects Senior Counsel Joshua Block. "The folks that passed these laws in West Virginia and Idaho and other states across the country, pass these laws with the goal of pushing transgender girls and transgender people in general out of public life."

Idaho leadership applauds High Court decision

Following the ruling, Idaho Governor Brad Little applauded the high court's decision, calling it "a historic moment for common sense."

"Idaho was the very first state to ban men from participating in women’s sports with the passage of the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act," said Little. "We are leading the nation in supporting generations of women and men who fought hard to uphold Title IX protections and keep girls and women safe."

Governor Little went on to thank the Idaho Legislature and Representative Barbara Ehardt, who originally introduced Idaho's Fairness in Women's Sports Act in 2020. He praised Ehardt "for her leadership on this issue of great importance to female athletes across Idaho and the nation."

Lieutenant Governor Scott Bedke echoed the governor's sentiments, calling the decision a "resounding victory for fairness in women's sports and for every young woman in Idaho."

"The Fairness in Women's Sports Act is about protecting the integrity of women's athletics and ensuring that decades of progress under Title IX aren't quietly undone," said Bedke. "The Supreme Court has now made clear that states have not just the right, but the responsibility, to defend that principle. I'm proud that Idaho led the nation on this issue and I want to thank my former colleagues in the Legislature for their courage in passing this law while I was Speaker in 2020. Idaho will keep standing for women and girls in athletics."

Attorney General Raúl Labrador, who requested that the U.S. Supreme Court review the case after taking office in January 2023, similarly welcomed the Supreme Court's validation.

"Today’s decision is a victory for common sense, fairness, and the countless girls and women who dedicate themselves to athletics,” said Attorney General Labrador. “Idaho led the nation by becoming the first state to protect women’s sports, and I’ve never wavered in defending that law. The Supreme Court has now confirmed that states can preserve fair competition and protect the opportunities that generations of women fought to secure. Every parent can rest assured that our law protects their daughters competing in Idaho."

Idaho's transgender community reacts

Proponents for Idaho's transgender community reacted to the ruling on social media.

"The Supreme Court acknowledged that transgender youth deserve dignity and respect. We believe dignity cannot exist alongside policies that exclude young people because of who they are," Transgender Idaho wrote in a statement. "School sports are about far more than competition—they foster confidence, teamwork, leadership, and belonging. Excluding transgender youth from these opportunities does not protect children; it isolates them."

They disputed the Supreme Court's majority view that transgender females have an inherent advantage over biological women in sports.

"Research continues to show that athletic performance is complex and influenced by many factors. Transgender women who undergo gender-affirming hormone therapy experience significant reductions in testosterone, muscle mass, and strength, and there is no broad scientific consensus that all transgender women have an inherent advantage across every sport or level of competition," the group stated. "It is also telling that these laws overwhelmingly target transgender women while largely ignoring transgender men. This reflects longstanding stereotypes about gender and reinforces harmful misconceptions about transgender women, despite evidence showing they are far more likely to experience harassment and violence than to pose a threat to others."