By Paul McCosby
In last week’s decisions in West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, the Supreme Court opened the way for states to protect girls’ sports. Maryland lawmakers should now follow West Virginia and Idaho by enacting similar protections for girls’ sports.
As the Court explained, neither Title IX nor the Equal Protection Clause requires states to allow biological males to compete on girls’ athletic teams simply because they identify as female. The Court recognized that the concept of “gender identity” is foreign to the historical understanding of sex on which both the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX were enacted. Even the dissent did not conclude that Title IX itself requires such a result.
The Court also rejected the argument that states must create a special constitutional exception for biological males who have taken puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones. The Court also declined to treat transgender status as a protected classification requiring heightened constitutional scrutiny.
As a result states need only justify maintaining separate boys’ and girls’ teams. That justification is straightforward: preserving fair competition and protecting the athletic opportunities Title IX was enacted to secure for women and girls.
The Court recognized that the purpose of separate boys’ and girls’ teams is to ensure that each sex can fairly enjoy the benefits of athletic competition. Allowing males to compete in women’s sports forces a breakdown of the entire system that is unfair to the other competitors.
The Court also rejected the argument that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones eliminate the athletic differences between males and females. Those biological differences remain significant in many sports and create both fairness and severe safety concerns for female athletes.
Idaho and West Virginia deserve praise for taking action to protect their students. A bill designed to provide similar protection for girls’ sports was introduced in the legislature this session, but opponents have repeatedly relied on the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board to block similar policies. Last week’s Supreme Court decision removes that excuse. Maryland lawmakers should now act to protect girls’ sports before further damage is done.
The consequences of judicial misinterpretation and legislative inaction are already visible in Maryland. The administration has responded with investigations into the Maryland State Department of Education, Montgomery County Public Schools, Prince George’s County Public Schools, and Frederick County Public Schools.
Nor is this an isolated example. In 2019, Anne Arundel County Public Schools adopted guidelines requiring biological males to be admitted to girls’ athletic teams as well as girls’ locker rooms, bathrooms, and overnight accommodations.
The harms resulting from transgender ideology did not happen by accident. They are the product of years of abuse of power by influential activists, aided by the acquiescence and collaboration of leaders in the scientific, medical, legal, and educational establishments. Too many people have become accustomed to treating falsehoods as facts. That must end.
Justice Clarence Thomas captured what is ultimately at stake:
“Men and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe that they are. Sex is an immutable biological characteristic… To use language to obscure reality—to show ‘indifference regarding the truth’—is to lie to the public.”
With our nation’s 250th birthday almost here, the Supreme Court’s decision gives states across the country the opportunity to reject the lies of transgenderism and speak truth in their laws.
The Court has done its job. The question now is whether Maryland lawmakers will do theirs. Girls in this state deserve the same protections already recognized in states like Idaho and West Virginia.
Paul McCosby is an attorney and Legislative Policy Writer with the Maryland Family Institute.
Recent Comments