It's Official: We Know Who Will Be Duking It Out for Georgia's Senate...
All Eyes on Georgia and Alabama Tonight
Here's What Happened During JD Vance's Appearance on The View
You'll Never Guess Why This Guy Burned a Cross in a Chicago Park
The Great Escape—Let Young Workers Out of Social Security
Here's What Was Just Revealed About One of the Alleged UFC Freedom 250...
There's a Ridiculous Bill Set to Make It's Way Through the California State...
One Israeli Strike Could Bring the New Iran Deal Crashing Down
California Requires Proof That You're Gay to Get These Taxpayer-Funded Contracts
James Talarico Got Paid Tens of Thousands of Dollars by a Firm That...
Peer Review Exposes Fatal Flaws in Study That Claimed 'Anti-Trans' Laws Spiked Teen...
DOJ Charges 15 Antifa Members After Violence Against ICE in Minneapolis
School Pays $95,000 After Punishing Student for Charlie Kirk Tribute
How a Calmer Border Is Helping Better Fight New World Screwworm
Gay Adoptive Fathers Found Guilty of Sexually Abusing, Murdering 13-Month-Old Baby Boy
Tipsheet

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Men in Women’s Sports...and Hoo Boy

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Men in Women’s Sports...and Hoo Boy
AP Photo/Susan Walsh

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday on whether state bans preventing transgender girls and women from competing in female school sports violate the Constitution.

Advertisement

"Today, my attorneys are arguing a crucial Supreme Court case pushing back against the trans agenda," Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote on X. "Our position: states have the authority to ban men from participating in women’s sports. This is common sense. We are fighting to protect girls and women in the locker room and on the playing field — and we will be successful."

The Supreme Court is considering a case that combines two separate cases from Idaho and West Virginia, Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., involving transgender students Lindsay Hecox and Becky Pepper-Jackson, who were prohibited by state law from competing on girls’ sports teams.

The legal issue centers on whether state bans on transgender girls competing in girls' school sports violate Title IX's prohibition on sex discrimination in education or the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by singling out transgender status instead of biological sex. 

The High Court's conservative majority appears poised to hand a victory to the states.

During oral arguments, Associate Justice Samuel Alito pressed the attorney representing the transgender athletes, getting her to concede that a male simply declaring himself a woman is not enough to guarantee the right to compete on a girls’ sports team. In other words, demonstrating that barring a so-called transgender woman from the girls’ team constitutes discrimination based on transgender status, not just sex, undermines the argument that Title IX’s protections for “sex” automatically extend to gender identity. A key argument for those fighting to expand protections for "transgender" individuals.

Advertisement

The Court’s newest member, a liberal justice, fared far less impressively, delivering what could be described as a word salad, as Idaho Attorney General Michael Hurst struggled to answer her question in full.

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement