West Virginia v. B.P.J.
Decision
BrynoDC Coverage 1 video
Opinion of the Court
The Facts
West Virginia enacted H.B. 3293, the Save Women's Sports Act, prohibiting transgender girls from competing on girls' sports teams in public schools. B.P.J., a transgender girl who has taken puberty blockers and estrogen since childhood, participated on a middle school girls' cross-country and track team and brought a Title IX and Equal Protection challenge. The Fourth Circuit ruled in her favor, and the case was consolidated with Little v. Hecox to resolve the circuit split.
The Issue
Whether state laws excluding transgender girls from girls' sports teams violate Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; and whether such laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Rules
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
No state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Discrimination because of sex under Title VII encompasses discrimination against transgender persons; persuasive authority for Title IX analysis.
Sex-based government classifications must be supported by an exceedingly persuasive justification.
The Application
West Virginia argues its law classifies on biological sex: a legitimate basis for organizing athletics. Title IX expressly permits 'reasonable provisions considering the nature of particular sports.' The 1972 Congress understood 'sex' as biological sex, and Bostock's Title VII reasoning does not extend to Title IX's different regulatory structure and legislative history.
B.P.J., a 15-year-old who has never experienced male puberty and has been on puberty blockers since childhood, argues the categorical exclusion has no relationship to competitive fairness in her case. A law must be substantially related to its stated purpose. Excluding someone with female physiology from girls' sports serves no fairness interest and stigmatizes her.
Argued January 13, 2026. The Court will likely uphold the ban and hold that Title IX does not prevent states from maintaining sex-separate sports based on biological sex. The Skrmetti precedent (2025) heavily favors West Virginia. Justice Kagan explored an as-applied middle path for individuals without male-puberty physiology, but it likely won't command a majority.
The Conclusion
[Awaiting opinion]
No circuit court data for this case.
Case Analysis
Overview
A case in which the Court will decide whether Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause allow a state to designate school sports teams for girls and boys based on students' biological sex as determined at birth.
Facts
West Virginia enacted H.B. 3293, the Save Women's Sports Act, prohibiting transgender girls from competing on girls' sports teams in public schools. B.P.J., a transgender girl who has taken puberty blockers and estrogen since childhood, participated on a middle school girls' cross-country and track team and brought a Title IX and Equal Protection challenge. The Fourth Circuit ruled in her favor, and the case was consolidated with Little v. Hecox to resolve the circuit split.
Issue
Whether West Virginia's Save Women's Sports Act, which excludes transgender girls from competing on girls' athletic teams in public schools, violates Title IX or the Equal Protection Clause as applied to a transgender girl who has undergone puberty suppression and hormone therapy from early childhood.
Rule
Title IX's athletics regulations (34 C.F.R. § 106.41) permit single-sex sports teams where selection is based on competitive skill or contact sport safety considerations. The Equal Protection Clause's intermediate scrutiny standard requires sex-based distinctions to be substantially related to an important governmental interest. Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), held that Title VII's prohibition on sex discrimination encompasses gender identity.
Analysis
West Virginia argues its law classifies on biological sex. A legitimate basis for organizing athletics. Title IX expressly permits 'reasonable provisions considering the nature of particular sports.' The 1972 Congress understood 'sex' as biological sex, and Bostock's Title VII reasoning does not extend to Title IX's different regulatory structure and legislative history.
Conclusion
Issued in conjunction with WV v BPJ. The states did not violate the constitution nor title IX.
Notes
Argued 2026-01-13. Added via SCOTUS OT2025 intake 2026-05-13.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support