by Michael K. Whitehead and Jonathan R. Whitehead, Attorneys, Kansas City, Mo.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – In one of the most significant rulings of the decade for women and girls, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 30 upheld state laws protecting female athletes from male competition — and delivered an historic double victory for Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the nation’s leading religious-liberty legal organization.
The Court ruled in *West Virginia v. B.P.J.* and *Little v. Hecox*, two consolidated cases challenging laws in West Virginia and Idaho that restrict sports competition to biological females. In a stunning result that exceeded many expectations, the Court voted “9-Nil” that Title IX — the 1972 federal law guaranteeing equal educational opportunity for women — permits states to maintain sex-specific sports teams. On the broader constitutional question under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Court divided 6-3 in the states’ favor, with the three liberal justices partially dissenting.
Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion. Writing for the Court, he posed the central question directly: “Under Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, may schools maintain women’s and girls’ sports for biological females? In other words, may schools determine eligibility for women’s and girls’ sports based on biological sex? The answer is yes.” The Court went on to explain: “Separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable: Given the inherent physical differences between the sexes, allowing only biological females to play on women’s and girls’ teams can reduce the risk of physical injury and ensure fair competition.”
Associate Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately in a concurrence: “The Court correctly holds that neither Title IX nor the Equal Protection Clause prohibits States from offering sex-separated athletics. A man does not have a legal right to compete against women just because he believes that he is a woman.” Associate Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented in part on the Equal Protection question.
The Cases
West Virginia enacted its Save Women’s Sports Act in 2021, defining athletic team eligibility based on biological sex at birth. ADF served as co-counsel to West Virginia Attorney General J. B. McCuskey and also separately represented Lainey Armistead, a former college soccer player, as an intervenor. The human stakes were vivid: ADF’s press release noted that the male plaintiff competing on the girls’ team defeated more than 470 girls over 1,400 times across several years, won the women’s state championship in shot put, and was involved in a locker room incident with ADF client Adaleia Cross.
Idaho enacted the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act in March 2020 — the first law of its kind in the nation — defining sex based on reproductive biology and genetics. Idaho Governor Brad Little signed the law; Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador later defended it at the Supreme Court with ADF as co-counsel. Two Idaho State University athletes, Madison Kenyon and Mary Kate Marshall, intervened through ADF after they experienced firsthand what it meant to lose to a male competitor on the women’s track team.
Both state laws had been blocked by lower courts. The Ninth Circuit ruled against Idaho, and the Fourth Circuit ruled against West Virginia. The Supreme Court granted certiorari (the appeal) in July 2025, consolidated the cases, and heard oral argument on Jan. 13, 2026.
What the Court Held
The Court reversed both circuit courts and remanded for entry of judgment consistent with its opinion. The injunctions that had blocked enforcement of the Idaho and West Virginia laws are now lifted. Key holdings:
- Title IX (9-0): The 1972 law’s protections for women in education do not prohibit sex-based eligibility rules for female sports teams. The statute was written to protect biological females and is consistent with states maintaining that distinction.
- Equal Protection (6-3): The Fourteenth Amendment does not require states to open women’s sports to biological males. Eligibility rules tied to biological sex serve important governmental interests — competitive fairness and physical safety — and do not constitute unconstitutional sex discrimination.
- Scope: Notably, the majority opinion did not require states to enact such laws; it held only that states *may* do so. The decision leaves room for states that have not enacted restrictions.
ADF’s Milestone: 20 Supreme Court Victories
The twin rulings push ADF’s record of direct Supreme Court victories to 20 since 2011 — a record unmatched among conservative public-interest legal organizations. ADF CEO, President, and Chief Counsel Kristen Waggoner called it “a victory for every girl who refused to stay quiet in the face of injustice. Men cannot be women, and no drug erases the male athletic advantage.” She added that with the June 30th ruling, “the 23 states still on the sidelines have run out of excuses. Protect women’s sports. Our girls have waited long enough.”
West Virginia AG McCuskey said the decision “affirms what common sense and the law have long made clear: States have the right to designate sports teams based on biological sex, not gender identity. Without that delineation, Title IX is turned on its head, and decades of hard-fought progress to advance female athletes is erased.”
Idaho AG Labrador declared: “Idaho led the nation by becoming the first state to protect women’s sports, and I’ve never wavered in defending that law. The Supreme Court has now confirmed that states can preserve fair competition and protect the opportunities that generations of women fought to secure.”
ADF’s Supreme Court record now spans some of the most consequential First Amendment and family-law cases in recent history, including *Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization* (overturning *Roe v. Wade*), *303 Creative* (free speech for creative professionals), *Masterpiece Cakeshop*, *Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, MO* (in which Jon and Mike Whitehead were co-counsel before SCOTUS), and earlier this year *Chiles v. Salazar* (striking Colorado’s counseling speech ban 8-1). The Supreme Court’s June 30th ruling marks four wins this year for the ADF legal ministry.
What Comes Next
The Supreme Court’s June 30th ruling will have immediate and wide-ranging effects:
- For the 27+ states with existing laws: Pending legal challenges to similar statutes across the country are now effectively resolved in the states’ favor. Injunctions blocking enforcement can be lifted.
- For the 23 states without laws: As ADF noted, they now have both the legal authority and the moral clarity to act.
- For the NCAA and national governing bodies: The NCAA reversed its policy in February 2025 and already excludes transgender women from women’s competition. The June 30th SCOTUS ruling cements that approach as constitutionally permissible.
- For Title IX broadly: The 9-0 Title IX holding is the most durable part of the opinion and sends a clear signal that the statute’s core purpose — protecting biological women in education — cannot be rewritten by gender-identity ideology.
- For Missouri: Missouri enacted its own Fairness in Women’s Sports protections in recent years. The Supreme Court’s ruling vindicates that law and removes any remaining legal uncertainty.
For Missouri Baptists, the Court’s decisions are one more confirmation of what sound theology has always taught: that God created human beings male and female, and that recognizing this biological reality in law is both morally right and legally sound. ADF, with the support of allies like the Mike and Jon Whitehead, has carried that truth into the nation’s highest courtrooms — and by God’s grace— has repeatedly won.
Mike and Jon Whitehead are attorneys in suburban Kansas City. Mike and Jon are allied attorneys with ADF, and Mike serves on the ADF governing board of directors. They frequently provide legal counsel to ministry organizations and churches, including the SBC and MBC. Jon filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in the above cases, which may be viewed at this link.
