America's Talking - Title IX central to transgender sports cases, advocates say

Episode Date: January 17, 2026

(The Center Square) - The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases on transgender athletes participating in girls' and women’s sports. Advocates for state laws banning transgender participation said the definition of "sex" under Title IX will be central to a favorable ruling from the court. Little v. Hecox and B.P.J. v. West Virginia dealt with whether preventing transgender athletes from competing in girls' and women's sports violated Title IX, a federal law prohibiting sex discrimination. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Greetings, everyone. Welcome to America's Talking, powered by the Center Square. I'm Dan McAulb, executive editor of the Center Square Newswire Service. The U.S. Supreme Court this week heard oral arguments in cases challenging bans on biological males who identify as female from playing in girls and women's sports. Joining me to discuss this as the Center Square reporter, Andrew writes, Andrew, the two cases in front of the court are out of West Virginia and Idaho, but a ruling could impact similar bands across the country. Tell us about the arguments in front of the justices. Absolutely. As you said, Dan, these cases were out of West Virginia and Idaho, but there are 27 states across the country who have some form of a ban against biological males who identify as

female from participating in girls and women's sports. So the Supreme Court was looking this week at two cases out of Idaho and West Virginia where these states were some of the first states to implement bans of this sort. And so they looked at these two cases. They were brought challenges by transgender athletes in each of the states. And the court was really looking at what do they define as sex in Title IX protections. Title IX is a federal law which prohibits sex discrimination. And the court was really taking a firm look at this because that law has led to a lot of progress in female sports over the past several years. So the court is really looking to define and argue what does Title IX mean in these arguments?

And how does that extend, how and if it extends to transgender individuals and transgender athletes? So the Corps was really looking at what does it look like to include these athletes and what does it look like moving forward with these arguments? One big argument that is a portion of this that a lot of the council for these transgender athletes was arguing that there is no competitive advantage for these biological males who identify as female because they have gone through processes where they have reduced testosterone. However, many justices on the court appeared skeptical of that decision, including Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch.

There are lots of different elements to this case, but it'll be really interesting to monitor as the court continues to look at it. Andrew, this has really been a polarizing issue across the country the last several years with with and it's it's it's it's it's largely uh those on the left um say it's discrimination to not allow transgender females biological males who identifies is as female um it's discrimination against them to not allow them um in women's and girls sports while as mostly those on the right conservatives uh say it's not fair to to biological girls and biological women uh for for biological males to compete in their sports. Did you get any sense from the justices questioning?

There's, of course, a 6-3 conservative majority on the bench, maybe 5-3-1, depending on how you feel about the Chief Justice on here. Did you get any sense that they were leaning one way or the other? Yes, there was certainly a sense that some of the justices were leaning one way or another. I think the most vocal justices in the oral arguments were Neil Gorsuch and Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Both of them were very vocal in their questioning. Kavanaugh, as a fun fact, Kavanaugh is a girls basketball coach, and that might have been some of his motivation to pursue an intense line of questioning. But both those justices, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh pointed to how unfair it would be if a transgender athlete competing in a women's or girls.

girls sports attempted one and won in a competition against a biological female. And that was a really big point of contention for them. They also highlighted a lot of scientific uncertainty over whether reduced levels of testosterone really truly eliminated a competitive advantage in these sports. They pointed to the fact that biological men have larger body mass, differences in bone density than biological females. And those are things that don't just change with hormones. So those were some big arguments that we were seeing, but even on the other side of the, the,

with the liberal justices, justices Sonia Sotomayor and Katangi Brown Jackson brought up arguments that transgender girls are being discriminated. Biological men who identify as women or transgender women and girls are being discriminated against unfairly. That argument got to the point that a lot of these state bans, particularly target biological men who identify as women, whereas biological females who identify as men are more openly allowed to participate in these women's sports. And so some of the justices were trying to needle in that point.

But for a majority of the bench, it really seemed as if this is going to be a ruling that that they're going to really closely adhere to some of these state bans and try to uphold those. Do we know yet, Andrew, when we expect to get a decision from the Supreme Court, unlike the tariff case, Donald Trump's tariffs that's before the Supreme Court, we could get a decision at almost any day now on the tariffs. Is this one of those that's going to be quick or is this one of those ones that's going to wait until the end of the term? A lot of advocates that I've spoken to about this issue are expecting the decision to come much later toward the end of the term. Whereas the tariff cases, the tariff case is equally high profile, but this is a large social issue that has been litigated in the courts for years, really. And the justices are really going to want to take their time with the majority opinion.

And of course, the dissenting opinions that will likely come, whichever way this case gets decided. But a lot of advocates I've talked to say this is one of the biggest cases of the. the Supreme Court's term. This is going to have far-reaching implications for, like I said, the 27 states that have these bans already in place and other states that have allowed transgender athletes to compete openly in sports. This is going to affect all states across the country. So we're looking at a late June, perhaps early July, decision for this.

Well, great reporting on this story, Andrew, and thank you for joining us today. Listeners can keep up with this ongoing story, all things Supreme Court related, and more at thecenter square.com.