Legal Insurrection by Timothy R. Snowball 9/22/2025
If biological males are permitted to compete on women’s sports teams, the result is not greater equality but the effective exclusion of women.On Friday, September 19, 2025, the Equal Protection Project filed two amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court. One in a case called Little v. Hecox, and the other in a case called West Virginia v. BPJ.
Both cases concern transgender women (men) challenging state laws limiting participation in women’s sports to biological women (women).
Even a decade or two ago if you told someone this issue would be controversial someday they likely wouldn’t have believed you.
Welcome to 2025.
Compared to the biological understanding of sex, the development of “gender identity” is a relatively recent development. It all began in leftist academic and medical circles for the purpose of developing therapeutic treatments for persons suffering from gender dysphoria, or psychological distress associated with a person’s biological sex not matching their internal sense of their “real” sex.
In that therapeutic setting, objectively verifiable biological evidence was, by definition, of limited relevance: blood tests, CAT scans, and other diagnostic tools that guide treatment of physical illness do little to resolve a patient’s psychological illness.
But these two cases present the Court with an entirely different context: drawing clear, fair lines for participation on competitive sports teams designated for women, based on the concrete and measurable definition of sex, in order to protect equal opportunities for female athletes.
More:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2025/09/equal-protection-project-supports-womens-sports-rights-in-two-u-s-supreme-court-cases/
