Law & Courts

Court Upholds Injunction on Arizona Transgender Sports Ban for Young Athletes

By Mark Walsh — September 09, 2024 3 min read
Arizona State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, left, a Republican, takes the ceremonial oath of office from Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Brutinel, right, as wife Carmen Horne, middle, holds the bible in the public inauguration ceremony at the state Capitol in Phoenix, Thursday, Jan. 5, 2023.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A federal appeals court on Monday ruled in favor of two prepubescent transgender female athletes seeking to play girls’ sports in school, agreeing with a lower court that there are no significant athletic differences between boys and girls before puberty.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, upheld an injunction that partially blocks an Arizona law barring transgender women and girls from college and school sports.

The injunction applies only to the two challengers as the case is litigated. One is identified in court papers as Jane Doe, an 11-year-old transgender girl who takes a puberty blocker and seeks to play on her middle school’s girls soccer and basketball teams as well as the coed cross-country team. The other is identified as Megan Roe, a 15-year-old who has taken puberty blockers for four years and seeks to play on her private high school’s girls volleyball team.

In Doe v. Horne, the 9th Circuit panel noted “that standards governing transgender participation in sports are evolving” but that the district court had found based on expert testimony that the “biological driver of average group differences in athletic performance between adolescent boys and girls is the difference in their respective levels of testosterone, which only begin to diverge significantly after the onset of puberty.”

Thus, the lower court found that transgender girls such as Doe and Roe, who begin puberty-blocking medication and hormone therapy at an early age, “do not have an athletic advantage over other girls.”

The district court’s findings were “firmly grounded in evidence,” and the judge “did not clearly err by finding that there are no significant differences in athletic performance between prepubescent boys and girls,” Judge Morgan Christen, an appointee of President Barack Obama, wrote for the panel.

(The other members of the panel were Senior Circuit Judge M. Margaret McKeown, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, and Senior District Judge David A. Ezra, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan.)

Appeals court backs injunction on basis of equal protection

At issue in the case is Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act, passed in 2022 and similar to numerous measures in other states. The law bars male and transgender female students from participating in women’s and girls’ sports, though state law had already barred men and boys from such participation.

The law was challenged by Doe and Roe and their parents under the 14th Amendment’s equal-protection clause and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which bars sex discrimination in federally funded educational programs.

The district court granted the injunction blocking the Arizona law with respect to the two challengers based on both equal protection and Title IX. The 9th Circuit upheld the injunction based only on the equal protection clause.

The appeals court said the state law does not afford transgender women and girls equal athletic opportunities because it permits cisgender women and girls to play on any teams, male or female, while transgender women and girls may play only on male teams. The law also permits all students other than transgender women and girls to play on teams consistent with their gender identities, the court said.

“Transgender women and girls alone are barred from doing so,” Christen said. “This is the essence of discrimination.”

Although the court did not rule on Title IX, it suggested the state defendants might have justifiable arguments on their claim that the state lacked clear notice from Congress that excluding transgender women and girls from female sports violates the statute. The defendants can press that argument as the full litigation over the state law proceeds, the court said.

The court also emphasized that its decision did not bar policymakers from adopting “appropriate regulations in this field.”

“States have important interests in inclusion, nondiscrimination, competitive fairness, student safety, and completing the still unfinished and important job of ensuring equal athletic opportunities for women and girls, who must have an equal opportunity not only to participate in sports but also to compete and win,” Christen said.

Events

Artificial Intelligence K-12 Essentials Forum How AI Use Is Expanding in K-12 Schools
Join this free virtual event to explore how AI technology is—and is not—improving K-12 teaching and learning.
Federal Webinar The Trump Budget and Schools: Subscriber Exclusive Quick Hit
EdWeek subscribers, join this 30-minute webinar to find out what the latest federal policy changes mean for K-12 education.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Curriculum Webinar
End Student Boredom: K-12 Publisher's Guide to 70% Engagement Boost
Calling all K-12 Publishers! Student engagement flatlining? Learn how to boost it by up to 70%.
Content provided by KITABOO

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Opinion What the Supreme Court Case on LGBTQ+ Books Reminds Us About Parents’ Rights
Regardless of which side wins Mahmoud v. Taylor, we have a big problem.
Jamie Kudlats & Christopher D. Thomas
5 min read
Man and woman waiting around speech bubble hole
E+/Getty
Law & Courts Retired Justice Souter, Advocate for Civics and Church-State Split, Dies at 85
Retired Justice David Souter, who wrote Supreme Court opinions on student strip searches and government aid to religion, has died.
4 min read
Retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter smiles during a new lecture series titled, "Constitutionally Speaking" on Sept. 14, 2012 in Concord, N.H. Souter spoke to more than 1,300 who packed a small theater to hear him.
Retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter, pictured participating a Sept. 14, 2012, lecture series on the U.S. Constitution in Concord, N.H., died May 8, 2025.
Jim Cole/AP
Law & Courts Trump Admin. Ends a Decades-Old School Desegregation Order—And Expects to End Others
Officials suggested that other desegregation orders dating to the Civil Rights Movement should be reconsidered.
5 min read
Students from Charlotte High School in Charlotte, N.C., ride a bus together, May 15, 1972.
Students from Charlotte High School in Charlotte, N.C., ride a bus together on May 15, 1972.
Harold L. Valentine/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Appears Open to Religious Charter School
The U.S. Supreme Court grappled with whether charter schools are public schools and whether the Constitution permits a religious charter.
7 min read
Supporters of charter schools rally outside of the Supreme Court on April 30, 2025, in Washington.
Supporters of religious charter schools rally outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on April 30, 2025, in Washington.
Mark Schiefelbein/AP