State of West Virginia v. B.P.J.

Description:  A legal challenge to West Virginia’s Save Women’s Sports Act that, if successful, would undermine women’s sports by allowing males who identify as female to compete with females in girls’ and women’s sports.

WASHINGTON – Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in United States of America v. Skrmetti protecting children from dangerous and experimental medical procedures, the states of West Virginia and Idaho, together with attorneys from Alliance Defending Freedom, filed supplemental briefs Monday urging the court to hear two women’s sports cases that it may have been holding until the Skrmetti decision.

In State of West Virginia v. B.P.J., West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey and ADF attorneys representing former college soccer player Lainey Armistead are asking the Supreme Court to hear their case after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled against West Virginia’s law protecting fairness in women’s sports. In Little v. Hecox, Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador, supported by ADF attorneys as co-counsel, is asking the high court to uphold his state’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit stopped the law from going into effect.

“We have always been confident in the merits of our case and defense of the Save Women’s Sports Act, which protects safety and fairness in women’s and girls’ sports. The law is constitutional and complies with Title IX. While Skrmetti is a landmark decision—our specific question remains, that is why we are asking the Supreme Court to take our case so the women and girls of West Virginia can begin enjoying the protections of the Save Women’s Sports Act,” McCuskey said.

“While we’ve been fighting for fair and equal athletic competition, activists have been pushing an agenda that will ultimately sideline women and girls in their own sports. Many athletic associations around the world have recognized the obvious truth that men and women are biologically different, and allowing men in women’s sports would create a dangerous, unfair environment for women to showcase their incredible talent. We’re asking the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold our law and ensure that women and girls get the opportunities they deserve,” Labrador said.

“Women and girls deserve to compete on a level playing field, but activists continue their quest to erase differences between men and women by forcing schools to allow men to compete in women’s sports,” said ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of Litigation Strategy Jonathan Scruggs. “This contradicts biological reality and common sense. We should be seeking to protect women’s sports and equal opportunities, and West Virginia’s and Idaho’s women’s sports laws accomplish just that. We are urging the court to listen to the countless girls across the country speaking out on this issue and restore fairness and safety for female athletes.”

In the West Virginia case, a middle-school male athlete competing on a girls’ track team finished ahead of nearly 300 girls in three years in cross-country and track-and-field events. Armistead intervened in the lawsuit to defend the state’s law, which was enacted to ensure equal athletic opportunities for women.

“Girls deserve a safe, fair playing field today—not years from now—and the [4th Circuit] ruling’s present harm to women and girls is stark. When biological males compete on women’s teams, female athletes lose championships, opportunities, and scholarships and suffer serious harms and safety risks,” the brief filed in State of West Virginia v. B.P.J. explains.

“While this petition has been paused pending Skrmetti, the movement to protect girls’ and women’s sports has kept making progress. In recent months both the federal government and the NCAA have announced policies excluding male athletes from female competitions, and the number of states with laws like Idaho’s has now reached 27. But the Ninth Circuit and many other courts still deny female athletes a level playing field, requiring them to compete against biologically male athletes. As a result, women and girls have missed out on hundreds of medals, podium spots, and opportunities to compete in their own sports. The Court should grant certiorari and resolve these issues now,” the brief filed in Little v. Hecox states.

Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization committed to protecting religious freedom, free speech, parental rights, and the sanctity of life.

# # #