By Kellen Blackwell
Oral arguments for West Virginia vs. BPJ and Little vs. Hecox, two cases of trans girls banned from participation on their high school or college sports teams, began on Jan. 14th. Both cases challenge these bans as violations of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause from the state level in West Virginia and Idaho. West Virginia vs. BPJ also argues a violation of Title IX, which prohibits gender discrimination in educational programs. These cases will have far-reaching implications for the legality of banning transgender athletes from sports at the state and federal levels.
The plaintiffs are Becky Pepper-Jackson, who was initially prevented from joining her middle school track team and is now in high school, and an unnamed collegiate athlete who was not allowed to try out for the women’s track team at Boise State University.
ACLU lawyer Chase Strangio reminded his followers leading up to the case that it is the bans are not about protecting women and girls, Title IX (in that Becky participating in the girls’ track team would be a violation of her cis teammates’ rights, not of her own), equality in sports, or any other transphobic fearmongering narrative. These cases, now and in the past, have targeted trans girls and women exclusively. There are less than ten transgender NCAA athletes, and even fewer than that are trans women. In other words, trans women make up less than 0.00002% of NCAA athletes.
Banning trans women and girls from sports has been a reliable touchstone of the right-wing culture war touted by Trump and others, and this exclusionary, hateful, and scientifically and historically inaccurate rhetoric doesn’t seem to be going away anytime soon.
Rulings in both cases is expected in late spring or early summer.
