The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this Tuesday regarding two cases concerning transgender girls in sports: Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J.
Idaho and West Virginia Laws at Issue
The cases center on laws enacted in Idaho and West Virginia that ban transgender girls and women from participating in school sports. In 2020, Idaho Governor Brad Little signed HB 500 into law, impacting Lindsay Hecox, a transgender student athlete who was barred from track, cross country, intramural soccer, and running clubs.
Similarly, in 2021, West Virginia Governor Jim Justice approved HB 3293. Becky Pepper-Jackson (B.P.J.), an incoming high school student, challenged the policy after it prevented her participation in cross country and track and field. Pepper-Jackson has undergone female puberty due to gender-affirming care, but West Virginia maintains its policies are justified based on her assigned sex at birth.
Potential Impact on Constitutional Law
These cases could potentially reshape the interpretation of the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause and the civil rights law, Title IX. Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally-funded schools. The Equal Protection Clause prohibits discrimination, and governments have argued that certain classifications warrant closer scrutiny.
Arguments and Concerns
Experts suggest the Court may attempt to narrow the scope of the cases by arguing the laws do not specifically target transgender people, a point contested by advocates. Jenny Pizer, an attorney with Lambda Legal, stated that arguments are being made that the laws are merely “technicalities or classifications.”
The states argue their policies are intended to “ensure safety and fairness in girls’ sports,” but advocates contend this justification serves as a pretext for excluding transgender individuals. Dannie Ceseña, director of California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, argued that excluding trans youth from sports “encourages the scrutiny of children’s bodies” and creates hostile environments.
Systemic Disempowerment and Future Outlook
Andrew Flores, a Distinguished Visiting Scholar at the Williams Institute, highlighted that political processes “systemically fail” transgender people, even in exercising their right to vote. Experts are uncertain about the Court’s ultimate decision, with some suggesting the cases may be sent back for further development.
While the immediate focus is on anti-transgender policies in sports, experts warn that LGBTQ+ rights are intertwined with issues of racial, economic, and disability justice. There is concern about a broader “constitutional campaign to really undermine civil rights.”
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Little v. Hecox about?
Little v. Hecox concerns the constitutionality of Idaho’s 2020 law, HB 500, which bans transgender girls and women from participating in school sports.
What is West Virginia v. B.P.J. about?
West Virginia v. B.P.J. challenges a similar ban enacted in West Virginia in 2021, HB 3293, and its impact on Becky Pepper-Jackson’s ability to participate in school sports.
What legal principles are being considered in these cases?
The cases raise questions about the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX, a civil rights law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in federally-funded schools.
As these cases unfold, advocates emphasize the importance of supporting transgender youth and fighting for a future where their rights and dignity are respected.