Supreme Court Sets Dates for Key Arguments on Women’s Sports
Dates have been confirmed for oral arguments in two Supreme Court cases that may shape the future of women’s sports.
On Tuesday, January 13, 2026, the justices will hear arguments in the cases of Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. BPJ. These cases revolve around the rights of states to prohibit biological males from participating in women’s and girls’ sports.
Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador, who is representing the state in Little v. Hecox, recently expressed his desire for a Supreme Court ruling that extends beyond merely states’ rights. He mentioned that the outcome might also influence how transgender individuals are treated under federal and state laws.
“I think the ruling will help clarify how we determine participation in women’s sports,” Labrador stated, reflecting on the potential significance of the decision.
John Bursch from the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is supporting both cases, has indicated that he won’t focus solely on states’ rights. Instead, he aims to address broader issues involved.
“It’s unnecessary to frame this merely as a states’ rights debate,” Bursch suggested. “Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause clearly indicate that there are fundamental differences between men and women.”
Understanding the Cases at Hand
The lawsuit Little v. Hecox was initiated in 2020 by Lindsay Hecox, a transgender athlete who wanted to join the women’s cross country team at Boise State University. However, she was halted by a state law that barred transgender athletes from competing in women’s divisions.
Lindsay was joined by an anonymous biological female, Jane Doe, who was apprehensive about possibly undergoing a verification process regarding gender. A federal judge intervened and blocked the Idaho law.
A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld this injunction in 2023, and the Supreme Court agreed to take up the case in July. Last month, Hecox requested SCOTUS to dismiss the challenge, stating that she has decided to step back from women’s sports and will no longer play at BSU or within Idaho.
Hecox sought to dismiss the case in September after the Supreme Court’s agreement but was denied by U.S. District Judge David Nye, who had been appointed by President Trump in 2017.
The second case, West Virginia v. BPJ, was brought by transgender athlete Becky Pepper Jackson. She initially received a preliminary injunction that allowed her to compete on her school’s teams. However, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the law violated Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause, prompting the Supreme Court to consider the state’s appeal.
In a brief from Jackson’s mother, Heather, she contended that West Virginia’s law prohibiting transgender athletes violates Title IX. Nonetheless, Title IX does not explicitly grant rights to biologically male transgender individuals identifying as women, a point that the current administration and West Virginia officials have not accepted.
