A Solid Win for Fairness, But New Hampshire Must Finish the Job
SCOTUS affirms sex-based categories under Title IX and the Constitution — now Governor Ayotte must sign HB 1442 to protect NH girls in sports, locker rooms, bathrooms, and prisons.
On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a solid win for women and girls — particularly female athletes. In the consolidated cases Little v. Hecox (Idaho) and West Virginia v. B.P.J., the Court held that states may maintain women’s and girls’ sports teams for biological females. The ruling was unanimous (9-0) on Title IX and 6-3 on the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
This is a major victory. The Court affirmed biological reality and rejected the radical push to erase sex-based categories in athletics. The welcome language shift throughout the opinions — acknowledging “biological males,” “biological females,” and the reality of sex differences — is itself a significant step forward.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion, clearly stating that Title IX allows schools to determine eligibility for female sports based on biological sex. “The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America.”
Justice Clarence Thomas issued an extremely strong concurring opinion. He warned against using language to obscure reality, stating: “To use language to obscure reality—to show ‘indifference regarding the truth’—is to lie to the public and cease to treat our fellow citizens ‘as equal[s].’” Citing Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power, Thomas cut through the ideological fog.
Justice Gorsuch concurred but defended aspects of his Bostock ruling. Many of us will never fully forgive the confusion Bostock created.
Bostock, the 14th Amendment, and Ongoing Challenges
In Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), the Court held that employment discrimination on the basis of “transgender status” constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII — without clearly defining the phrase. Some advocates have tried to weaponize it to argue that transgender-identifying individuals form a specially protected class under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
The sports ruling pushes back hard. It distinguishes Title IX (education, with explicit sex-segregation allowances designed to protect biological females) from Title VII (employment). The Court refused to let Bostock erase female protections in athletics. However, as Kara Dansky notes, we realistically won’t be fully out of the woods until the Supreme Court more thoroughly cleans up the Bostock mess.
Kristen Waggoner rightly highlighted the human cost often ignored by sympathetic media coverage of B.P.J.: the male athlete defeated over 470 girls more than 1,400 times (including a state title) and sexually harassed a female athlete, Adaleia, in the girls’ locker room — leading Adaleia to quit the sports she loved. “Boys’ feelings are the focus. Girls’ safety, fairness, and opportunity take a back seat.” Today’s decision begins to reverse that pattern.
The Dissenting Views and Why They Fall Short
The three liberal justices agreed with the majority on Title IX (9-0 overall) but dissented in part on Equal Protection. Justice Sotomayor’s opening — framing B.P.J. as “a transgender girl who wants to live her life consistent with her gender identity” — prioritizes feelings over facts and emotional manipulation over evidence.
Independent Women’s Network Competition Report: Key Insights
The Independent Women’s Law Center’s Third Edition of “Competition: Title IX, Male Athletes, and the Threat To Women’s Sports” is essential reading.
Standalone Summary: Competitive sport is a zero-sum game. The inclusion of male athletes in women’s categories inevitably displaces females. The report synthesizes the science on permanent male advantages, critiques gender ideology’s denial of reality, and details how such policies undermine Title IX’s promise to biological females. It calls for maintaining clear sex-based categories to protect opportunity, safety, and fairness.
Key Quotes and Points:
“In a zero-sum competition, the inclusion of male athletes in women’s sport inevitably means that females lose out.”
“As the number of male athletes seeking to compete on women’s teams… grows, the risks to female athletes also grow. Claims to the contrary deny science, defy logic, and undermine Title IX.”
NCAA Gender Eligibility Rules (Post-2025 Update)
Following President Trump’s executive order and now reinforced by the June 30, 2026 SCOTUS ruling, the NCAA Board of Governors updated its transgender participation policy in February 2025. The changes are clear and significant:
Women’s Teams – Competition: Restricted to student-athletes assigned female at birth only. Athletes assigned male at birth may not compete on NCAA women’s teams. No waivers are available (including amended birth certificates).
Women’s Teams – Practice & Benefits: Athletes assigned male at birth may practice with women’s teams and receive associated benefits (such as medical care and, in some cases, scholarships), but they cannot compete.
Men’s Teams: Open to all eligible student-athletes, regardless of sex assigned at birth or gender identity.
Athletes Assigned Female at Birth on Testosterone: May not compete on women’s teams (the team may be reclassified as mixed and lose championship eligibility), but they may continue practicing.
This represents a major shift from the prior framework, which relied on testosterone suppression thresholds. The new policy prioritizes biological sex for competition eligibility in women’s categories while still allowing limited participation in practice settings. It aligns strongly with Title IX’s original intent and the Supreme Court’s unanimous holding on Title IX.
This is a major improvement from prior testosterone-suppression rules. It aligns with Title IX and the SCOTUS ruling.
The Fight in New Hampshire
Here in the Granite State, the ruling lands amid ongoing battles — and exposes troubling inconsistencies from our leaders.
Governor Kelly Ayotte posted today celebrating the ruling and saying it’s unfair for biological males to compete in women’s sports. As a mom of a daughter who competed in varsity sports, she should understand the stakes. Then sign the bills.
Ayotte has vetoed multiple pieces of legislation designed to protect women and girls. This includes SB 552 and at least two other similar bills that would have safeguarded single-sex spaces in locker rooms, bathrooms, crisis centers (domestic violence shelters), and prisons. How can a governor claim to support separate sports for biological females while allowing males into the very locker rooms and bathrooms where girls change, shower, and undress? The contradiction makes no logical sense. Sports and private spaces are inseparable — you cannot have fair competition without safe, sex-segregated facilities. Allowing males into locker rooms while pretending to protect sports is incoherent and leaves girls vulnerable.
Governor Chris Sununu vetoed similar protections once before her. Both administrations offered lame reasoning that often boiled down to concerns about “inclusion,” potential lawsuits, or avoiding “controversy” — all while ignoring the lived experiences of female athletes, survivors of male violence (including my own), and parents across New Hampshire.
HB 1442 is a narrow, common-sense measure that clarifies biological sex can be used where privacy, safety, and fairness are at stake — bathrooms, locker rooms, sports, crisis centers, and secure facilities. With the Supreme Court’s green light, there is no excuse for further delay. Governor Ayotte should sign it immediately. Delay is not neutral; it falls hardest on women and girls.
The Path Forward
The Supreme Court has affirmed biological reality. Now it’s time for New Hampshire leaders to act. Sign HB 1442. Enforce sex-based protections fully. Our daughters deserve more than symbolism — they deserve safety, privacy, and fair competition.
Women’s rights are human rights. They were hard-won and should never be surrendered to ideology. Biology is not bigotry. Fairness is not optional. New Hampshire must lead.
By Bronwyn Sims
NH State Chapter Leader, Independent Women’s Network
#WalkAway NH State Leader
Athlete & Girls’/Women’s Gymnastics Coach
