In recent oral arguments regarding two cases, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed concerns over state laws that restrict men, including transgender individuals, from participating in women’s sports. She pointed out that the state seems unclear on how to define womanhood.
Jackson had previously garnered attention during her confirmation hearings for declining to define what a woman is, stating, “No, I can’t” and “I’m not a biologist” when discussing the biological aspects of adult human females.
On Tuesday, she employed terminology commonly associated with progressive gender theorists, using phrases like “gender assigned at birth”—a notion many argue is misleading because gender is often seen as an inherent characteristic from birth. Terms like “cisgender woman” (a woman who accepts her assigned gender) and “transgender girl” (referring to someone who identifies as a girl) were also part of her language.
Jackson elaborated that while there is a general rule for sports participation based on one’s birth gender, there’s also a definition of gender identity that distinguishes between participants. “Cisgender girls can play in line with their gender identity, transgender girls can’t,” she remarked during the discussions about the case of West Virginia vs. BPJ.
She further questioned the criteria for what constitutes a girl, pondering if only those “assigned” as girls at birth are eligible for women’s sports teams.
“I think I got what the Chief Justice was trying to convey. It revolves around whose definition we rely on. We can distinguish between boys and girls and are now re-evaluating what makes someone a girl, to say that only those assigned as girls at birth qualify,” Jackson stated.
Other justices, even those with conservative views like Justice Amy Coney Barrett, also used language typical of gender discourse during these inquiries. This raised concerns among advocates for women’s sports and conservative circles.
In response, conservative Christian podcaster Allie Beth Stuckey made a comment on social media, emphasizing the importance of precise language in discussions about gender. She argued, “Terms like ‘cisgender’, ‘trans girl’, or ‘trans boy’ are misused. ‘Gender identity’ isn’t a valid concept. People aren’t ‘assigned’ a gender at birth. The term ‘biological’ suggests other kinds of men and women exist. Procedures like puberty blockers don’t affirm gender but are more akin to sterilization or mutilation.” She added that progress is still needed, especially since even justices like Barrett are using this terminology.
