WASHINGTON −TheSupreme Courtis taking up one of the nation's most high-profile and divisive cultural issues, debating on Jan. 13whether states can bar transgendergirls and womenfrom joining female sports teams in schools.
"This case is monumental not only for West Virginia, but for our entire country," West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey said in a statement.
Thechallengesto bans in West Virginia and Idaho come a year after the high courtruledthat states can prevent transgender minors from receiving puberty blockers and hormone therapy.
In a different realm of the law but similar cultural terrain in October, a majority of the justicesseemed ready to strike downa Colorado law blocking therapists from trying to change a young person's sexuality or gender identity.
The majority took a different tack in 2020,sidingwith three employees who were fired because they were gay or transgender, a ruling the student athletes challenging the athletic bans hope will boost their case.
Here's what you need to know about the latest dispute.
More:National debate on transgender athletes finally reaches Supreme Court
How many states restrict sports participation of transgender girls?
Twenty-seven states bar transgender girls and women from joining female sports teams. Other states either prohibit such bans or have not taken a position.
President Donald Trump, who campaigned on the issue, has moved tocut off federal fundingto schools that allow transgender females to participate in girls' and women's sports.
After Trump issued hisexecutive orderlast year, the National Collegiate Athletic Associationlimited competitionin women's sports to athletes who were assigned female at birth. And the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee said it would comply with Trump's order
What prompted the bans?
Thesuccessof two transgender track athletes in Connecticut drew national attention to the issue starting in 2017, and it became a hot policy issue in state legislatures across the country. Three runners who lost to the athletes are pursuing an ongoing lawsuit.
"The Connecticut story is not the only story out there, but it is a story that Idaho should pay very much attention to," Idaho state Rep. Barbara Ehardt said in 2020 when promoting what became the first state law addressing the issue.
How many transgender athletes are there?
Idaho and West Virginia describe the participation of transgender athletes in female sports as a significant problem, but advocates say the scope of the problem has blown out of proportion.
There are no definitive statistics about how many students are affected by the bans.
In 2024, NCAA President Charlie Baker told a Senate panel he was aware of fewer than 10 transgender athletes competing in all college sports across U.S. campuses.
TheWilliams Instituteat the UCLA School of Law, a think tank that researches sexual orientation and gender identity issues, estimates that as many as 122,000 transgender youth could be participating in high school-level team athletics. At the college level, less than 1.5% of student athletes are probably transgender, according to the institute.
What are the specific bans being challenged?
Idaho's law prohibits transgender women and girls from playing on female teams from primary school through college, including both intramural sports and competitive, elite teams.
West Virginia's ban also applies at every level of competition, but only from middle school through college.
Neither law takes into account players' athletic ability or how far along they are in their transition.
Before the ban, transgender girls in West Virginia could compete on female teams unless the state athletic body determined their participation was unsafe or unfair to other athletes.
Who is challenging Idaho's law?
Lindsay Hecox, a senior at Boise State University who began her challenge in 2020, said Idaho's law should not apply to her. Because her testosterone is being suppressed and she is getting estrogen, Hecox says her testosterone levels are typical of non-transgender women and her muscle mass and size have decreased.
Hecox played soccer and ran on school club teams, the "no-cut" sports she turned to because she wasn't fast enough to make the competitive NCAA cross-country and track teams, according to her lawyers.
In September, however, Hecox said that she was no longer playing sports andasked the Supreme Courtto let her drop her challenge. Hecox said she's afraid she will be harassed and have trouble graduating if the high-profile case continues.
Idaho opposes Hecox's request and the court said it wouldn't act on it until after the oral arguments.
More:Transgender athlete at center of Supreme Court challenge wants out of the case
Who is challenging West Virginia's law?
Becky Pepper-Jackson, a West Virginia 10th grader assigned male at birth, has lived publicly as a girl since the fourth grade. Because she received puberty-delaying medication and estrogen, Pepper-Jackson's physical characteristics are typical of non-transgender girls, according to her lawyers.
West Virginia says Pepper-Jackson still has a physical advantage that helped her place third in a state discus throwing competition and eighth in shot put last year.
Pepper-Jackson attributes her athletic achievements to hard work and practice, and her lawyers say her performance is "well within the range" of other girls her age.
What are the legal arguments against the state bans?
Pepper-Jackson argues that West Virginia's ban violates the Title IX civil rights statute barring sex-based discrimination in education.
In 2020, theSupreme Courtsaid employees who are gay and transgender are protected by a similar civil rights law that bars discrimination in the workplace based on sex. Because sexual orientation and gender identity necessarily involve a person's sex, the law protects gay and transgender people, the majority said in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee and one of the most conservative justices.
Pepper-Jackson's attorneys said West Virginia's law should fall for the same reason.
But the state says the situations are different. While an employee's sex is generally irrelevant in the workplace, biological differences are critical to fairness on the athletic field, West Virginia argues.
Title IX allows schools to have separate teams for girls and boys, and, in the state's view, Pepper-Jackson is a biological boy, even if she identifies as a girl.
Why do the trans students say the bans are unconstitutional?
Both Pepper-Jackson, the West Virginia student, and Hecox, the Idaho student who is hoping to be released from her case, have argued that the state bans also violate the Constitution's equal protection clause because they treat people differently based on their sex and whether they're transgender. If the court agrees, the states would have to show why the different treatment is justified.
The students say the bans are not justified because they don't take into account whether transgender women like Hecox, who takes cross-gender hormones, or like Pepper-Jackson, who never experienced typical male puberty, may not have a physiological advantage.
West Virginia and Idaho argue that transgender women retain advantages even after hormonal treatments so can be treated differently.
Are transgender people protected as a group by the Constitution?
In past decisions about transgender rights, the Supreme Court has not said whether transgender people as a group are entitled to stronger legal protections under the equal protection clause.
Idaho and West Virginia argue that transgender people don't meet the necessary criteria because they don't share "immutable" characteristics and don't lack political power.
"In today's America, they have substantial representation and power, both in politics and elsewhere," Idaho's attorneys wrote in a filing.
Lawyers for the students counter that transgender people are a discrete minority historically subject to discrimination and their "lack of political power is made plain by the vast array ofrecent government actions targeting them."
More:Transgender Americans feel 'invisible,' fear for safety over Trump's rhetoric, policies
How did the lower courts rule?
Lower courts barred Idaho and West Virginia from enforcing their laws against Hecox and Pepper-Jackson while their challenges were being litigated.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco,said Idaho's law likely violates the equal protection clause.
The Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the law also violates Title IX in part because it excludes transgender students from girls' teams regardless of whether they have a competitive advantage.
Banning Pepper-Jackson from competing on female teams, the court said, "would treat her worse than people to whom she is similarly situated, deprive her of any meaningful athletic opportunities, and do so on the basis of sex."
Can transgender females compete on male teams?
West Virginia argues Pepper-Jackson is not barred from participating in sports under the state law because she can compete on male teams.
Pepper-Jackson's lawyers say that is not a real option as it would be "isolating, stigmatizing, and publicly humiliating." They also said it would be contrary to her medical treatment for gender dysphoria, the distress caused when someone's gender expression doesn't match their sex assigned at birth.
Does the public support the bans?
Two-thirds of adultssurveyedlast year by the Pew Research Center favor requiring transgender athletes to compete on teams that match their sex assigned at birth.
A 2025Gallup pollshowed similar results.
What do other athletes say?
Dozens of students who said they've competed against transgender athletes filed briefs telling the Supreme Court they lost opportunities and feared for their safety.
Selina Soule, who ran high school track in Connecticut, said she missed qualifying for a 55-meter race by two spots while two "biological males" made the cut. Although she qualified in other events at the regional championship, she had less ability to impress college scouts, Soule said.
Sara Casebolt, a student at the University of Idaho, said she doesn't want to share a locker room or a hotel room during team travel with biological males.
Athletes who weighed in on the other side said they'd seen firsthand that transgender women don't have an advantage and don't pose safety concerns.
When will the Supreme Court issue its decision?
The court is expected to rule on the two cases by the end of June or early July.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Supreme Court takes up 'monumental' case about transgender athletes
