NEWNow you can listen to Pak Gazette articles!
Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador and the rest of the legal defense seeking to “save women’s sports” have been granted the opportunity to present oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court after a trans athlete attempted to have a potential landmark case dismissed.
The Supreme Court ordered Monday that it would delay a decision on the trans athlete’s attempt to dismiss the case until after oral arguments are presented.
A federal judge ruled against the trans athlete’s motion last week, but the Supreme Court’s decision would definitively determine whether the case proceeded or not. Now, the case will at least move on to oral arguments, which will likely take place in January.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON PakGazette.Com
Trans athlete Lindsay Hecox began the legal battle in 2020. That year, Hecox wanted to join the women’s cross-country team at Boise State, and blocked the state law that prevented 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.
Hecox’s challenge was successful, as a federal judge blocked the Idaho state law. A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals then upheld an injunction blocking the state law in 2023, before the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in July. The Supreme Court also agreed to hear a similar case in West Virginia involving a trans athlete, West Virginia v. BPJ.
Hecox asked SCOTUS last month to drop the challenge, claiming that the athlete “has therefore decided to permanently retire and refrain from playing any women’s sport at BSU or in Idaho.”
INSIDE GAVIN NEWSOM’S TRANSGENDER VOLLEYBALL CRISIS
Hecox attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Cooley, LLP and Legal Voice provided a statement to Pak Gazette Digital.
“Lindsay ended her participation in any women’s sports program covered by HB 500 to prioritize finishing her career at Boise State and her personal safety and well-being. Lindsay withdrew her challenge to Idaho’s HB 500 and that remains unchanged. In West Virginia v. BPJ, the U.S. Supreme Court will address a challenge to a nearly identical law. We will continue advocating for the rights of all women and girls, including transgender women and girls. “We look forward to presenting oral arguments in accordance with the Court’s order,” the statement read.
Meanwhile, Labrador previously said he hopes the Supreme Court will issue a decision with a broader impact than simply allowing a state to apply its own specific law on the issue. He wants a new national precedent.
“I think that’s what they’re going to do,” Labrador previously told Pak Gazette Digital in an exclusive interview. “I think they’re going to make an important decision about whether men can participate in women’s sports and, more importantly, how to determine whether transgender people are protected by the federal constitution and state and federal laws.”
