NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A coalition of 130 congressional Democrats filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court urging it to rule in favor of two trans athletes in forthcoming cases over the protection of women’s sports and national enforcement of Title IX.
The coalition, which includes nine senators and 121 House members, is led by Congressional Equality Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Becca Balint, D-V.t., Democratic Women’s Caucus Chair Rep. Teresa Leger, D-N.M. Fernández, and Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii.
The list of signees include prominent figures on the party’s left wing, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn. The list also includes House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries and Rep. Nancy Pelosi. The list does not include noted moderate Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., or Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM
The 130 Democrats on the list urge the court to side with Becky Pepper-Jackson, a trans teen from West Virginia who successfully challenged the state’s law that prohibits biological males from competing in girls’ sports, and Lindsay Hecox, who successfully challenged a similar law in Idaho to compete on Boise State’s women’s cross-country team.
“Categorical bans—such as the bans in West Virginia and Idaho—undermine those protections and the ability of transgender students to be part of their school community,” the brief writes.
Hirono wrote in an announcement of the brief, “All students deserve equal access to opportunity in schools—whether in the classroom, on the playing field, or in other settings. No student should be discriminated against based on who they are.
“A categorical ban on transgender students participating in sports not only harms these students, but also subjects women and girls to harassment and discrimination, and leads to the policing of children’s bodies. This contradicts the very purpose of Title IX: ending discrimination in federally-funded education programs. These bans are blatant discrimination, and the Court should say so.”
The congressional Democrats are taking this position even as support for trans athletes in women’s and girls’ sports emerged as a weakness for voters and point of contention within the party over the last year.
LEGAL DEFENSE TO ‘SAVE WOMEN’S SPORTS’ GRANTED RIGHT TO MAKE ARGUMENT TO SCOTUS AMID TRANS ATHLETE DISPUTE
In January, a New York Times/Ipsos survey found the vast majority of Americans, including a majority of Democrats, don’t think transgender athletes should be permitted to compete in women’s sports.
Of the 2,128 people who participated, 79% said biological males who identify as women should not be allowed to participate in women’s sports. Of the 1,025 people who identified as Democrats or leaning Democrat, 67% said transgender athletes should not be allowed to compete with women.
What to know about the two cases
The Little vs Hecox and West Virginia vs BPJ cases were each initially legal wins that enabled biological males to bypass their state’s laws to compete against females. But now that the cases will be heard by the Supreme Court, a decision could have a wide-ranging impact on the legality of trans athletes in women’s sports going forward.
The cases are set for oral arguments on Jan. 13 in Washington, D.C.
The Little v. Hecox lawsuit was initially filed by trans athlete Lindsay Hecox in 2020, when the athlete wanted to join the women’s cross-country team at Boise State and had the state’s law to prevent trans athletes from competing in women’s sports blocked.
Hecox was joined by an anonymous biological female student, Jane Doe, who was concerned about the potential of being subjected to the sex dispute verification process. The challenge was successful when a federal judge blocked Idaho’s state law.
A 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld an injunction blocking the state law in 2023, before the Supreme Court agreed in July to hear the case. Hecox then asked SCOTUS last month to drop the challenge, claiming the athlete “has therefore decided to permanently withdraw and refrain from playing any women’s sports at BSU or in Idaho.”
Hecox tried to have the case dismissed in September after the Supreme Court agreed in July to hear the case, but U.S. District Judge David Nye, appointed by President Donald Trump in 2017, rejected Hecox’s motion to dismiss the case.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The West Virginia v. B.P.J. lawsuit was brought against the state of West Virginia by trans athlete Becky Pepper-Jackson, who was initially granted a preliminary injunction allowing the athlete to participate on the school’s sports teams. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law violated Title IX and the equal protection clause. Now the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the state’s appeal.
In a response brief, the athlete’s mother, Heather Jackson, argued West Virginia’s law that prohibits transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports violates Title IX.
However, Title IX does not explicitly protect the right of biologically male transgender people to identify as women. The Trump administration and West Virginia state government do not interpret Title IX as protective of that right.
Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.