October 1, 2026
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld state laws that bar biological males from competing on girls’ and women’s school athletic teams, ruling that the Constitution and Title IX do not require states to allow athletes to compete based on gender identity rather than biological sex.
The ruling came in cases from Idaho and West Virginia, where state laws reserve female athletic teams for biological females. The court’s conservative majority ruled 6-3 that the state bans do not violate the Constitution’s equal protection guarantees. The court unanimously agreed that the laws also do not violate Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the court that “states may maintain women's and girls' sports for biological females" to address concerns about safety and competitive fairness.
“The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America," Kavanaugh wrote.
The decision is expected to affect more than two dozen other Republican-led states that have adopted similar restrictions on biological males competing in female sports.
The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention praised the decision as a significant victory for women’s sports, biblical truth and biological reality. The ERLC filed amicus briefs supporting the state laws in both cases.
“Today, the Supreme Court upheld both the biblical standard for sexuality and a commonsense approach to defining sex,” ERLC President Evan Lenow said. “In the joint opinion of two women’s sports cases, the Court determined that girls’ and women’s sports teams may be reserved for biological females and that states have the right to separate sports teams based on biological sex.
"On numerous occasions, Southern Baptists have addressed the concern over transgender ideology in our culture, most recently in a 2025 resolution. In that resolution, the Convention specifically addressed women’s sports and concerns over biological males competing against females, stating that ‘the participation of biological males and females in opposite gender sports … represents a rebellion against God’s design for male and female … and undermines fairness, safety, and truth.’ This convictional clarity from Southern Baptists undergirds and bolsters the ERLC’s efforts to champion God’s good design for gender and sexuality in a confused culture.”
The cases involved challenges to laws in Idaho and West Virginia. In the West Virginia case, 16-year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson challenged the state’s law after seeking to compete in girls’ sports. In the Idaho case, Lindsay Hecox sued over the state’s law while seeking the opportunity to try out for women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University.
Supporters of the laws argued that states have a legitimate interest in protecting fairness and safety in female athletics. Idaho Solicitor General Alan Hurst told the court that the law is “necessary for fair competition because, where sports are concerned, men and women are obviously not the same.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the court’s equal protection ruling and read part of her dissent from the bench. She said the majority was wrong to reject Pepper-Jackson’s claim and argued that students should not be automatically barred from teams while scientific questions remain under debate.
“We just simply do not know scientifically that transgender students pose dangers,” Sotomayor said in a dissent joined by the court’s other liberal justices.
Kavanaugh, who has coached girls’ basketball, wrote that women’s sports play an important role and that no student-athlete should be mistreated because of the dispute.
“No student-athlete on either side of the issue, whether a biological female or transgender, deserves to be ostracized or vilified,” he wrote.
The decision follows other recent Supreme Court rulings involving gender ideology and the scope of civil rights laws. In 2020, the court held that LGBTQ people are protected under federal workplace discrimination law. Last year, the court’s conservative majority declined to extend similar reasoning when it upheld state bans on gender-related medical procedures for minors.
The question before the justices Tuesday was whether states may maintain sex-specific teams in school athletics. The court answered yes.
President Donald Trump applauded the ruling in a social media post, calling it a “BIG WIN.”
Public opinion has generally supported limits on biological males competing in girls’ sports. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in October 2025 found that about 6 in 10 U.S. adults strongly or somewhat favored requiring children and teenagers to compete on sports teams that match their sex at birth rather than gender identity.
The ruling leaves unresolved separate lawsuits challenging state laws and regulations in places such as Connecticut and California that allow athletes to compete consistent with gender identity.
For Southern Baptists, Lenow said, the decision aligns with long-held convictions about God’s design for male and female and the need to protect fairness in women’s sports.
The ERLC said the ruling affirms that states may reserve girls’ and women’s athletic teams for biological females and may define sex according to biological reality under both the Constitution and Title IX.
Share with others
