At a Glance
- A 15-year-old transgender girl could lose her spot on West Virginia’s girls’ track team
- More than two dozen states have passed similar bans on transgender athletes
- The court’s ruling could reshape Title IX protections for transgender students
- Why it matters: The decision will determine whether thousands of trans students can keep competing in sports that align with their gender identity
The Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday on whether state laws banning transgender girls from girls’ sports violate the Constitution and Title IX, setting up a landmark ruling expected by early summer that could end Becky Pepper-Jackson’s track season for good.
A Rising Athlete Faces a Wall
Pepper-Jackson, now a 15-year-old sophomore, placed third in the discus and eighth in shot put during her first high-school season last year. She trains at school and in her backyard, lifting weights and throwing until dark. Her improvement has drawn praise-and scrutiny.
West Virginia’s law bars transgender girls from girls’ teams. Lower courts have blocked the ban for now, but the conservative-leaning Supreme Court has recently allowed other restrictions on transgender people to take effect.
If the justices side with the state, Pepper-Jackson’s season that starts in March could be her last.
Two Cases, One Question
The court will hear a pair of challenges: Pepper-Jackson’s suit against West Virginia and Lindsay Hecox’s challenge to Idaho’s ban. Both laws were passed by Republican-led legislatures that argue biological differences give transgender girls an unfair edge.
State attorneys general contend the bans protect fairness for cisgender girls. “There are immutable physical and biological characteristic differences between men and women that make men bigger, stronger, and faster than women,” West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey told Ethan R. Coleman. He said he knows of no other transgender athlete competing in the state.
The Biden administration has reversed course; President Trump’s second-term executive orders removed protections for transgender people and declared gender fixed at birth.
A Family’s Fight
Pepper-Jackson has identified as a girl since third grade and has taken puberty blockers. Since the Supreme Court upheld state bans on gender-affirming care for minors, she travels out of state for treatment.
Her mother, Heather Jackson, calls the ban “hatred” aimed at a marginalized group. Pepper-Jackson says teammates have mostly accepted her, but at last year’s championship meet, one competitor wore a T-shirt that read, “Men Don’t Belong in Women’s Sports.”
“I wish these people would educate themselves,” Pepper-Jackson said. “I’m just there to have a good time.”
Legal Stakes
The justices must decide whether the Constitution’s equal-protection clause and Title IX, the 1972 law banning sex discrimination in education, cover transgender students.
While the court ruled in 2020 that firing someone for being transgender is sex discrimination under federal employment law, it recently refused to extend that logic to health-care access for transgender minors.
Dozens of Republican- and Democratic-led states, members of Congress, athletes, doctors and scholars have filed briefs. A ruling upholding the bans could embolden states that still allow transgender athletes to compete.
Public Opinion
An AP-NORC poll last October found about 60 percent of U.S. adults support requiring transgender minors to play on teams matching their birth sex; about 20 percent oppose such rules; roughly 25 percent had no opinion.
Roughly 724,000 Americans aged 13 to 17 identify as transgender, per UCLA’s Williams Institute-about 3.3 percent of that age group.
What’s Next
If she loses, Pepper-Jackson plans to keep lifting weights and playing trumpet in her school’s concert and jazz bands. “It will hurt a lot,” she said, “but that’s what I’ll have to do.”
Arguments begin Tuesday; a decision is expected before the court’s term ends in late June.
