In California, Supreme Court Ruling on Trans Girls Sports Doesn’t Apply. Here’s Why

The justices ruled that Title IX allows for schools to determine eligibility for women and girls’ sports based on biological sex.

“Women and girls should be allowed to compete for those life-changing opportunities on an equal playing field, without fear of physical injury from biological males or being forced to compete against biological males,” wrote Justice Brent Kavanaugh on behalf of the court’s conservative majority.

Attorneys for Lindsay Hecox and Becky Pepper-Jackson, transgender student-athletes in Idaho and West Virginia, had argued that the bans violate Title IX of the Education Amendments, which bars sex discrimination in education. Pepper-Jackson also alleged that West Virginia’s law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In 2020, Hecox, then a Boise State University student, sued Idaho after it became the first state in the nation to pass a law banning transgender women and girls from participating on girls’ sports teams. She alleged that the ban violated her rights by preventing her from trying out for the university’s NCAA track and cross country teams as a freshman. Hecox’s case was also joined by a cisgender high school athlete, who said she feared that her sex might be “disputed” under the act.

Pepper-Jackson, a 15-year-old shot put and discus athlete in West Virginia, sued the state in 2021 over its similar “Save Women in Sports” Law, which prohibited her from joining her middle school’s track and cross country teams.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan issued a partial dissent, saying that while Pepper-Jackson’s Title IX claim failed, her challenge under the Equal Protection Clause should be returned to the district court to address “unresolved factual questions.”

While the case doesn’t overturn state laws protecting transgender student-athletes, it could have ramifications in California, which was sued in 2025 by the Trump administration over its policies allowing trans students to compete on teams consistent with their gender identity. Already, conservative activists have taken to social media, threatening to push legislation barring transgender athletes from girls’ sports in more states.

“Blue states with boys on girls’ podiums … you’re next,” Kristen Waggoner, the CEO of parents’ rights group Alliance Defending Freedom, wrote on the social media platform  X on Tuesday.

Trevor Norcross, whose transgender daughter is a track and field athlete in the Central Coast town of Arroyo Grande, said he’s afraid Democratic lawmakers could bow to that political pressure.

“It’s become a very politically sensitive discussion,” he said. “Our own governor, Governor Newsom, has made some very poorly worded and poorly thought-through comments.”

Newsom questioned the fairness of transgender students’ participation on girls’ sports teams in an episode of his podcast in 2025, and later told KQED’s Political Breakdown that he believes there should be changes in state law clarifying when and how transgender women and girls can compete in women’s sports.

Norcross’s daughter, Lily, 17, worries that Newsom could move to do so before his term ends in November. She also said that the state’s likely gubernatorial elect, Xavier Bacerra, “has refused to give a definitive comment on whether or not he will protect trans athletes.”

The National Collegiate Athletic Association and U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committees have also banned transgender women from women’s sports, following an executive order from President Donald Trump threatening to withhold federal funding from educational institutions that allow trans women to compete on girls’ teams.

Outside of school sports, the ruling could inform other cases surrounding trans rights — like litigation currently playing out across the country regarding federal funding for schools with protections for transgender students and healthcare centers that offer gender-affirming care.

Dale Melchert, an attorney with the Transgender Law Center, said the decision “takes off the table one of the powerful legal tools we have at our disposal to advocate for trans communities.”

“If the Supreme Court says that the Constitution doesn’t protect trans people, that is clearly devastating, regardless of whether you live in a state that is supportive or not,” he continued.