Home

Daily News

Law banning transgender students from female…

LGBTQ Legal Issues Law banning transgender students from female sports likely unconstitutional, 9th Circuit says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

August 17, 2023, 2:55 pm CDT

•  
• !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs'); Tweet  
• lang: en_US  
• reddit_target='law';  
• 

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at San Francisco has ruled for Lindsay Hecox, a transgender college student at Boise State University who wanted to try out for the cross-country team and play club soccer. Photo from the American Civil Liberties Union’s press release.

A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled for a transgender college student who challenged an Idaho law that bars transgender athletes from participating in women’s and girls' student sports in public schools.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at San Francisco upheld a finding that the law likely violates the equal protection clause, according to an Aug. 17 press release by the American Civil Liberties Union.

Bloomberg Law has coverage.

The appeals court ruled for Lindsay Hecox, a student at Boise State University who wanted to try out for the cross-country team and play club soccer.

The 9th Circuit upheld an injunction banning enforcement of the Idaho law, the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act. The law bars all transgender women and girls from participating in or trying out for public school female sports teams at every age—from intramural to elite teams.

The law provides for a verification process that can be invoked by a person who wants to dispute another person’s sex. The process requires “intrusive medical procedures,” the appeals court said in an Aug. 17 opinion by Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw.

The American Civil Liberties Union had filed the lawsuit, along with the ACLU of Idaho, Legal Voice and Cooley.

The case is Hecox v. Little.

A different federal appeals court, meanwhile, ruled Monday that parents didn’t have standing to challenge a policy that barred schools from telling parents that their children are transgender when the parents are deemed unsupportive.

Reuters and Law.com have coverage.

The 4th Circuit at Richmond, Virginia, ruled that parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, lacked standing because they had not alleged that their children were transgender or struggling with issues of gender identity.

The parents’ opposition to the policy was a mere “policy disagreement,” wrote Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. for the appeals court in the Aug. 14 decision.

The case is John and Jane Parents 1 v. Montgomery County Board of Education.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Related topics: 4th Circuit Court | 9th Circuit Court | States | Constitutional Law | Civil Rights | Entertainment & Sports Law | Education Law | Government | Maryland | Idaho | Public Interest | LGBTQ Legal Issues | Fourteenth Amendment You might also like:

• Federal judge orders release of county's unrepresented defendants, says problem is 'complete tragedy'
• Constitution bars Trump from presidency, 2 conservative law profs conclude in upcoming article
• 2nd Circuit rejects free exercise challenge to law ending religious exemptions for immunization mandate
• Ban on lifetime voting for some felons violates Eighth Amendment, 5th Circuit rules
• 9th Circuit dissenters take aim at state-created danger doctrine

Give us feedback, share a story tip or update, or report an error.