Hecox v. Little
Description: The American Civil Liberties Union is challenging Idaho’s Fairness in Women's Sports Act to force female athletes to compete against biological males who identify as female.
Women's groups, 26 states ask US Supreme Court to hear cases seeking to protect women's sports
WASHINGTON – Multiple states, women’s sports advocacy groups, businesses, and other organizations have filed friend-of-the-court briefs asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear two cases concerning state laws that protect women’s sports. The states of West Virginia and Idaho, together with attorneys from Alliance Defending Freedom, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court last month on behalf of female athletes.
In B.P.J. v West Virginia State Board of Education, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and ADF attorneys are asking the Supreme Court to hear their case after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled to undermine West Virginia’s ability to protect fairness in women’s sports. ADF represents former college soccer player Lainey Armistead. In Hecox v. Little, Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador and ADF attorneys are asking the high court to uphold their 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. ADF represents former college track and field athletes Madison Kenyon and Mary Kate Marshall.
“Back in April, the Fourth Circuit handed down a 2-1 ruling that reversed an earlier decision upholding the West Virginia’s Save Women’s Sports Act. I promised back then that I would keep fighting for the safety, wellbeing and fairness in women’s sports, and I’m keeping that promise. I am thankful for the support coming from Alliance Defending Freedom and my many colleagues in other states,” Morrisey said.
“While we’ve been fighting for fair and equal athletic competition, activists have been pushing a radical agenda that will ultimately sideline women and girls from sports. Many athletic associations around the world have seen 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 in sports. These voices from different backgrounds have joined us as we ask the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold our law and ensure that women and girls get the opportunities they deserve,” said Labrador.
“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 women’s sports leagues to allow men to compete,” said ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of Appellate Advocacy John Bursch. “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. Lainey, Madison, Mary Kate, and millions of girls across the country deserve to compete on a level playing field with other women. The wide range of backgrounds from these groups petitioning the court proves that this isn’t political or partisan—it’s basic fairness.”
In B.P.J., a middle-school male athlete competing on a West Virginia girls’ track team finished ahead of almost 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.
“Neither Title IX nor the Equal Protection Clause compels West Virginia to classify biological males as girls,” says the multi-state brief in B.P.J. “Yet that was the Fourth Circuit panel majority’s holding below. That holding is profoundly wrong and has far-reaching consequences for States nationwide.”
In Hecox, Kenyon and Marshall, who ran track and cross-country at Idaho State University, are defending Idaho’s women’s sports law alongside the state. The two women are long-time athletes who are well familiar with the differences in strength, speed, and stamina between comparably gifted and trained male and female athletes. They have both been forced to compete against a male athlete—and have been pushed down in the rankings as a result.
A brief from 102 female athletes, coaches, sports officials, and parents of female athletes includes testimonies from women who lost opportunities to male athletes. “I swam the 500 freestyle in preliminaries where I got 17th, which means I did not make it back to the finals and was first alternate,” says the testimony of Reka Gyorgy, a two-time ACC Champion from Virginia Tech and 2016 Hungarian Olympian. “I watched Lia Thomas [a biological male] from the pool deck win a women’s national title in a finals that I deserved to be in because the rules in place did not support biological women. I couldn’t help but cry and feel frustrated, angry, and sad. It hurt me, my team, and other women in the pool.”
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.
# # #
Videos
- Madison Kenyon b-roll
- Mary Kate Marshall b-roll
- Madison Kenyon and Mary Kate Marshall b-roll
- Press conference following 9th Circuit oral arguments (2021-05-03)
Photos
Commentary
Previous News Releases
Legal Documents
Related Resources
ABOUT John Bursch
John Bursch is senior counsel and vice president of appellate advocacy with Alliance Defending Freedom. Bursch has argued 12 U.S. Supreme Court cases and more than 30 state supreme court cases since 2011, and a recent study concluded that among all frequent Supreme Court advocates who did not work for the federal government, he had the 3rd highest success rate for persuading justices to adopt his legal position. Bursch served as solicitor general for the state of Michigan from 2011-2013. He has argued multiple Michigan Supreme Court cases in eight of the last ten terms and has successfully litigated hundreds of matters nationwide, including six with at least $1 billion at stake. As part of his private firm, Bursch Law PLLC, he has represented Fortune 500 companies, foreign and domestic governments, top public officials, and industry associations in high-profile cases, primarily on appeal. He received his J.D. magna cum laude in 1997 from the University of Minnesota Law School and is admitted to practice in numerous federal district and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.