The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to consider a challenge to Idaho’s ban on transgender athletes in girl’s and women’s sports.
The court will also take up a lawsuit related to a similar ban in West Virginia.
Idaho in 2020 became the first state in the nation to implement this kind of ban, which prohibits transgender athletes from participating on any team designated for women or girls, from public K-12 schools to universities. Similar laws are in place in 27 states.
The ACLU of Idaho and the national American Civil Liberties Union challenged Idaho’s law immediately, arguing that it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment — which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. The West Virigina case additionally challenges the other law based on Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in educational programs.
Federal courts initially blocked Idaho’s law from taking effect. But the block was later narrowed to only protect the suing athlete, Linsday Hecox. That came after the U.S. Supreme Court, in another Idaho case called Poe v. Labrador, narrowed the scope of preliminary injunctions.
Idaho governor, bill sponsor confident law will prevail. ACLU of Idaho hopes court will find law unconstitutional
Idaho Gov. Brad Little, in a statement, said he was “confident Idaho’s common sense laws to defend women’s sports will prevail.”
Little said he was honored to join President Donald Trump in February when he signed an executive order prohibiting transgender athletes from competing on women’s sports teams consistent with their gender identity.
“Within weeks of President Trump taking over the White House as our nation’s 47th president, he reversed years of attacks on girls and women who have worked hard for the opportunity to play fairly and safely in their chosen sport,” Little said. “And it all started with Idaho.”
ACLU of Idaho spokesperson Rebecca De León said the group was confident that the Supreme Court “will agree with federal court rulings that this ban is unconstitutional.”
“Despite this ruling, Idaho remains an incredibly hostile state for transgender people, despite a national trans athlete ban failing to pass Congress earlier this year,” De León said. “Idaho will be on the wrong side of history on this issue, and transgender people are the ones paying the price for it.”
Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, who sponsored the legislation, said even at the time she was sure it would go to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“It’s finally going to get its day in front of the Supreme Court and I am more than thrilled,” Ehardt told the Idaho Capital Sun in a phone interview.
She also said she felt confident that the bill would be upheld. Ehardt said that since 2020 she has traveled to several states to advocate for similar legislation, and that she feels “vindicated” after she had initially faced questions over if the law was needed.
She plans to attend the hearing when it comes before the court.
Idaho Attorney General Labrador asked the court to hear the case
Last week, Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador urged the U.S. Supreme Court to take up Idaho’s case, called Hecox v. Little, Idaho Education News reported.
In a statement Thursday, Labrador said he was thrilled that the Supreme Court would hear Idaho’s case.
“For too long, activists have worked to sideline women and girls in their own sports,” Labrador said. “Men and women are biologically different, and we hope the Court will allow states to end this injustice and ensure that men no longer create a dangerous, unfair environment for women to showcase their incredible talent and pursue the equal opportunities they deserve.”
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee state law that bans gender-affirming care for minors. Idaho has a similar state law.
The case will be argued in the fall and decided in 2026, ABC News reported.
“Elite athletic organizations around the world allow trans athletes to compete on teams that align with their gender identity, and there’s no reason why Idaho can’t do the same thing,” said Kelly O’Neill, an attorney at Legal Voice that is representing the suing athlete. “It’s hard to imagine that a kindergartner in Idaho should be subjected to harsher rules than an Olympic athlete.”
The Supreme Court has previously ruled on other transgender-related issues
The high court in June ruled that Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming health care for minors was constitutional, ruling that children who seek the treatment don’t qualify as a protected class, the Tennessee Lookout reported.
A lawsuit challenging Idaho’s Idaho’s similar law was also dismissed that same day because the transgender teenagers who filed the lawsuit moved out of the state, which ended federal court protections for those minors and allowed Idaho’s ban to take full effect, the Sun reported.
The challenge to Tennessee’s ban on providing puberty blockers, hormones, or certain surgeries — known collectively as gender-affirming care — was also based on the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The court in 2020 handed down another landmark decision that workplace discrimination based on gay or transgender status was a violation of federal law in the case Bostock v. Clayton County.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.SUPPORT Idaho Capital Sun is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Idaho Capital Sun maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Christina Lords for questions: info@idahocapitalsun.com.