Transgender Sports Ban Stalled as US Supreme Court Concludes Term

U.S. Supreme Court ended its term without deciding on transgender sports law.

Arizona law prohibits transgender women from competing in girls’ sports.

The timeline for a potential ruling from the Court remains uncertain.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent term concluded on June 30, leaving unresolved the fate of transgender girls participating in girls’ sports in Arizona.

State officials sought to contest a federal court ruling which implemented a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the Save Women’s Sports Act.

Passed in 2022, this legislation asserts that teams designated for women and girls “may not be open to students of the male sex,” with male sex defined by birth anatomy.

Despite the Supreme Court’s inaction, there may still be further proceedings.

The justices could potentially discuss legal arguments from state officials on July 3, in efforts to overturn recent rulings against the law. Alternatively, they may uphold those lower court decisions.

Currently, two transgender girls involved in this legal battle continue to participate on girls’ teams: one at Gregory School in Tucson and the other at Kyrene Aprende Middle School in Chandler.

The final resolution of this legal dispute will dictate Arizona’s enforcement capabilities regarding its new law.

Advocates for the law highlight concerns regarding biological advantages, arguing it is unfair for those assigned male at birth to compete against cisgender girls.

While the 2022 law’s direct impact on athletes appears minimal, it did replace an existing policy from the Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) requiring approval from experts for transgender girls’ participation.

Court records indicate that, prior to the law, only seven out of twelve requests to join girls’ teams were approved from approximately 170,000 student athletes annually.

Notably, the present lawsuit, initiated in 2023, centers around two transgender girls who are currently on puberty blockers and have yet to experience puberty.

U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer Zipps issued a preliminary injunction against the law, stating that the pair possess “athletic capabilities like other girls their age.”

The Supreme Court now considers a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision supporting Judge Zipps’ ruling.

Appellate Judge Morgan Christen noted the ban’s failure to consider individual circumstances, affecting students across all education levels and various sports.

The law explicitly distinguishes based on a student’s transgender status, disregarding relevant factors like hormone levels.

State schools chief Tom Horne defends the law, arguing for a universal standard over individual assessments due to inherent athletic disparities observed as early as elementary school.

Horne referenced several studies that suggest boys may hold advantages in strength and stamina even prior to puberty; however, these studies do not correlate these differences directly to competitive outcomes.

Furthermore, Christen pointed out that the Arizona law inadvertently allows participation for most students while specifically excluding transgender girls.

“The act discriminates on its face based on transgender status,” she stated.

The Supreme Court’s potential review hinges on the implications of the ruling and the arguments regarding discriminatory intent in the law’s enactment.

Rachel Berg, representing the transgender girls, advocates for the Court to defer, awaiting a definitive ruling from Judge Zipps on the law’s future.

The ongoing debate follows the high court’s decision that allows Tennessee to restrict gender-affirming medical treatments for minors, establishing different legal grounds in Arizona.

A finding of improper legislative motive in Arizona could significantly influence the legal landscape.

The Supreme Court granted permission for attorneys to question key lawmakers to uncover possible discriminatory motives related to the law’s passage.

The process remains ongoing, with crucial documentation yet to be disclosed.