NEWNow you can listen to Pak Gazette articles!
A coalition of 130 congressional Democrats filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court urging it to rule in favor of two trans athletes in upcoming cases over the protection of women’s sports and national enforcement of Title IX.
The coalition, which includes nine senators and 121 House members, is led by Congressional Equality Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Becca Balint, DV.t., Democratic Women’s Caucus Chair Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez, D-N.M., and Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii.
The list of signatories includes prominent figures from the party’s left wing, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn. The list also includes House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Rep. Nancy Pelosi. The list does not include prominent moderate Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., or Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON PakGazette.Com
All 130 Democrats on the slate urged the court to side with Becky Pepper-Jackson, a trans teenager from West Virginia who successfully challenged the state law banning biological males from competing in women’s sports, and Lindsay Hecox, who successfully challenged a similar law in Idaho to compete on the Boise State women’s cross-country team.
“Categorical bans, like those in West Virginia and Idaho, undermine those protections and the ability of transgender students to be part of their school community,” the report writes.
Hirono wrote in an announcement of the report: “All students deserve equal access to opportunities in schools, whether in the classroom, on the playing field, or in other settings. No student should be discriminated against because of their identity.
“A categorical ban on transgender students participating in sports not only harms these students, but also subjects women and girls to harassment and discrimination, and leads to the policing of children’s bodies. This contradicts the very purpose of Title IX: to end discrimination in federally funded educational programs. These bans are blatant discrimination, and the Court should say so.”
Congressional Democrats are taking this position even as support for trans athletes in women’s and girls’ sports emerged as a weakness with voters and a point of contention within the party over the past year.
LEGAL DEFENSE TO ‘SAVE WOMEN’S SPORTS’ GIVES RIGHT TO MAKE ARGUMENTS TO SCOTUS AMID TRANS ATHLETES DISPUTE
In January, a New York Times/Ipsos poll found that the vast majority of Americans, including most Democrats, do not believe transgender athletes should be allowed to compete in women’s sports.
Of the 2,128 people who participated, 79% said that biological men who identify as women should not be allowed to participate in women’s sports. Of the 1,025 people who identified as Democrats or Democratic-leaning, 67% said transgender athletes should not be allowed to compete with women.
What to know about the two cases
The Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. BPJ cases were initially legal victories that allowed biological males to circumvent their state’s laws to compete against women. But now that the cases will be heard by the Supreme Court, a decision could have a wide-ranging impact on the legality of trans athletes in women’s sports in the future.
The cases are scheduled for oral arguments on January 13 in Washington, DC.
The Little v. Hecox was initially introduced by trans athlete Lindsay Hecox in 2020, when the athlete wanted to join the women’s cross-country team at Boise State and was blocked by a state law preventing trans athletes from competing in women’s sports.
Hecox was joined by an unnamed biological student, Jane Doe, who was concerned about the possibility of being subjected to the sexual dispute verification process. The challenge was successful when a federal judge blocked the Idaho state law.
A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an injunction blocking the state law in 2023, before the Supreme Court agreed in July to hear the case. Hecox then asked the court last month to drop the challenge, claiming the athlete “has therefore decided to permanently retire and refrain from playing any women’s sport at BSU or in Idaho.”
Hecox tried to have the case dismissed in September after the Supreme Court agreed in July to hear the case, but U.S. District Judge David Nye, appointed by the president donald trump In 2017, he denied Hecox’s motion to dismiss the case.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE Pak Gazette APP
The West Virginia v. BPJ was filed against the state of West Virginia by trans athlete Becky Pepper-Jackson, who was initially granted a preliminary injunction allowing the athlete to participate on the school’s sports teams. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law violated Title IX and the equal protection clause. Now the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the state’s appeal.
In a response brief, the athlete’s mother, Heather Jackson, argued West Virginia Law banning transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports violates Title IX.
However, Title IX does not explicitly protect the right of biologically male transgender people to identify as female. The Trump administration and the West Virginia state government do not interpret Title IX to protect that right.
