When a male competes in female athletics, women are sidelined with nowhere to go.
In the wake of a Supreme Court ruling affirming states' right to recognize biological distinctions in athletics, nearly half the country remains unchanged — twenty-three states still permit biological males to compete in girls' sports, leaving female athletes to navigate a landscape where legal victory and lived reality have yet to converge. The struggle has expanded beyond questions of medals and scholarships into allegations of physical harm, privacy violations, and institutional silence, revealing how profoundly law and culture can diverge even after a landmark decision. Activists, attorneys, and young women are now turning to state legislatures, ballot measures, and civil litigation to close the gap between what the Court permitted and what millions of girls still experience each day.
- A Supreme Court ruling celebrated as a turning point has left female athletes in twenty-three states exactly where they started — competing against biological males or choosing not to compete at all.
- Allegations of sexual assault during a girls' wrestling match and harassment claims from a West Virginia student-athlete have shifted the debate from competitive fairness into questions of physical safety and bodily privacy.
- Legal groups are pursuing damages for lost scholarships, forfeited medals, and stolen opportunities, arguing that institutions had no lawful basis under Title IX for the policies they imposed on women's sports.
- State-level battles are intensifying — Nevada signals incoming legislation, Colorado faces a November ballot measure, and the Department of Justice is suing California, Illinois, Minnesota, and Maine over noncompliant policies.
- A Vermont school's $566,000 settlement and a culture of fear among coaches illustrate how deeply institutional pressure has suppressed dissent, even as the legal tide begins to shift.
Soleil Hoefer, a Washington high school athlete, knew before each race began that she would lose — not for lack of preparation, but because the biological differences were simply insurmountable. What haunted her most was not her own experience but the knowledge that her younger sister would soon face the same impossible choice: compete against biological males or step away from the sport entirely.
For girls in twenty-three states, the Supreme Court's ruling changed nothing on the ground. The decision confirmed that states may draw sex-based lines in athletics, but it did not compel them to do so. Nineteen of those states actively permit transgender athletes to compete on girls' teams, and Washington — Hoefer's home — is among them.
The fight has grown darker than debates over medals. A Washington family filed suit alleging their daughter, wrestler Kallie Keeler, was sexually assaulted by a biological male athlete during a girls' match. Alliance Defending Freedom's Kristen Waggoner, leading the case, described the incident as devastating and insisted the issue now encompasses locker rooms, hotel rooms, and contact sports — not only trophies. A West Virginia student-athlete, Adaleia Cross, has alleged sexual harassment in similar circumstances, and though her school district found the claims unsubstantiated and the accused athlete denied them, Cross has become a prominent voice for girls who say they are not safe sharing private spaces with male competitors.
The legal and legislative map is fracturing along state lines. Twenty-seven states have enacted biological sex protections; nineteen have not. Four others have imposed restrictions through athletic associations rather than statute. California and Illinois are resisting the ruling outright, while the DOJ pursues litigation against them alongside Minnesota and Maine. Nevada's governor has pledged legislation, and Colorado voters will weigh a ballot measure in November 2026.
Vermont has become a symbol of the cultural stakes. Mid Vermont Christian School received a $566,000 settlement after being barred from state competition for forfeiting a game against a team with a transgender athlete. Coach Chris Goodwin described a climate in which colleagues feared losing their jobs for speaking out — a silence his wife Bethany distilled plainly: girls should not be forced to choose between competing against boys and not competing at all.
A new wave of litigation is now seeking accountability for past seasons. Lawsuits by Riley Gaines against the NCAA and by Brooke Slusser against San Jose State argue that institutions violated Title IX by placing biological males in women's competition. Attorney Bill Bock contends the Supreme Court's reasoning strips away any legal cover those institutions once claimed. Former Idaho State runner Madison Kenyon, whose own scholarship funded a nursing career, put the human cost simply: when a male athlete takes a spot on a women's team, a woman is displaced with nowhere to go.
For Hoefer, the abstract arguments matter far less than the concrete reality awaiting her sister. The next frontier, she and advocates agree, is not Washington, D.C. — it is Washington state, Vermont, California, and the twenty other places where the fight for girls' sports is only beginning.
A Washington high school soccer player named Soleil Hoefer remembers the moment she realized the Supreme Court's decision on transgender athletes would not change her life. During her junior year, she faced a biological male goalkeeper in a showcase tournament in Las Vegas. During her senior year, she ran the 400 meters against a male competitor. Both times, she knew before the race began that she would lose—not because she hadn't trained hard enough, but because the physical differences were insurmountable. What frustrated her most, though, was not the medals or the times. It was knowing her younger sister would soon face the same choice: compete against boys or don't compete at all.
For millions of girls across America, the Supreme Court's ruling changed nothing. Twenty-three states still lack laws protecting women's sports based on biological sex, and nineteen of those actively allow transgender athletes to compete on girls' teams. Washington is one of them. Hoefer's frustration reflects a broader reality: the legal victory that activists celebrated has not translated into relief for female athletes in nearly half the country. The ruling answered whether states can recognize biological distinctions in sports, but it did not require them to do so.
But the fight has moved beyond fairness in competition. Earlier this year, a Washington family filed a lawsuit alleging their daughter, a wrestler named Kallie Keeler, was sexually assaulted by a biological male transgender athlete during a girls' wrestling match. Kristen Waggoner, CEO and chief counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom, the legal group leading the case, described the incident as devastating and horrendous. She emphasized that the debate over girls' sports is not limited to trophies or scholarships—it is about privacy and physical safety in locker rooms, bathrooms, hotel rooms, and contact sports. Waggoner said she wished the case were isolated, but it is not.
Adaleia Cross, a West Virginia student-athlete, has alleged sexual harassment after a transgender athlete competed on her school's girls' teams. Cross and her legal representatives maintain the harm occurred, though the school district previously found allegations unsubstantiated and the athlete and her mother have denied the harassment claims. Cross has become a voice for girls who say they are not safe sharing private spaces with male athletes. "Girls are not safe when they have to share private spaces with men, and people just don't talk about it enough," she said. "If more people were aware going forward, more people would be angry."
The next phase of the battle is unfolding at the state level. Twenty-seven states now have laws protecting girls' and women's sports based on biological sex. Nineteen states actively allow transgender athletes to compete in girls' sports. Four states—Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Alaska, and Virginia—have imposed sex-based restrictions through education agencies or athletic associations rather than statute. California and Illinois have resisted the ruling, with Governor Gavin Newsom's office stating it does not affect California's laws and Governor JB Pritzker calling the Supreme Court decision a setback for equality. Both states, along with Minnesota and Maine, are being sued by President Donald Trump's Department of Justice over their policies. Nevada's Republican governor has signaled he will push for legislation during the 2027 session, and Colorado voters will decide a ballot measure in November 2026 that could mandate teams based on biological sex.
Vermont has become a flashpoint for the cultural fight. Mid Vermont Christian School received a $566,000 settlement in damages and legal fees after being barred from state competitions following its 2023 girls' basketball forfeit against a team with a transgender athlete. The school's basketball coach, Chris Goodwin, said the settlement did not resolve the larger issue. He described a culture of fear in Vermont, where coaches and administrators told him they would be punished or lose their jobs for opposing the state's transgender policies. His wife, Bethany Goodwin, put it simply: "Girls obviously shouldn't be forced to have to compete against boys and have that choice of either compete against boys or don't compete at all."
A new phase of litigation is also emerging: accountability for past seasons. The Supreme Court ruling did not award damages to female athletes affected by transgender athlete policies, but lawsuits by Riley Gaines against the NCAA and by Brooke Slusser against San Jose State and the Mountain West Conference seek damages for women who say they lost equal opportunities, privacy, safety, or fair competition. Bill Bock, an attorney leading those cases, said the ruling undermines institutions' argument that Title IX required them to allow biological males identifying as female into women's sports. "They had no basis for what they did to women," he said. Madison Kenyon, a former Idaho State runner and voluntary defendant in the Supreme Court case, emphasized that girls who lost medals, podium places, and scholarships deserve more than a symbolic victory. "We need to give the rewards to the women who won them," she said. Her own scholarship enabled her to earn a nursing degree and build a career as an emergency room nurse. When a male competes in female athletics, she said, women are sidelined with nowhere to go.
Waggoner said the Supreme Court's reasoning about biological differences is now central to ADF's next lawsuits. The court recognized that these differences are real and they matter. For every position a boy takes on a girl's team, it takes away an equal opportunity from a girl. Title IX's whole purpose is to provide equal opportunities to women and girls, she argued, making the current policies a violation of that law. The NCAA changed its transgender athlete policy in 2025 to limit women's competition to student-athletes assigned female at birth, and the Supreme Court's opinion noted that the NCAA, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee, and the International Olympic Committee had all drawn sex-based lines for female competition. For Hoefer, the abstract legal arguments matter less than the concrete reality of her little sister entering high school in a state where girls still have no relief. "The more people speak out, parents advocate, people advocate, administrations advocate, then it'll just kind of be an overtaking of the show of people who do think that this is wrong," she said. The next frontier is not Washington, D.C. It is Washington state, Vermont, California, and the twenty other states where the fight for girls' sports is just beginning.
Citas Notables
Girls are not safe when they have to share private spaces with men, and people just don't talk about it enough.— Adaleia Cross, West Virginia student-athlete
We need to give the rewards to the women who won them. There are so many women who took first place and didn't get their trophy or their medal.— Madison Kenyon, former Idaho State runner
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does the Supreme Court ruling feel like a loss to these athletes if they won the case?
Because the ruling said states can protect girls' sports based on biological sex—it didn't say they must. In the 23 states without protections, nothing changed the day after the decision. The legal victory was real, but it didn't reach the girls still competing against boys.
The sexual assault allegations seem to be a turning point in how people talk about this issue. Why are those cases so central to the activists' argument now?
Because they shift the conversation from fairness to safety. Before, critics could dismiss the debate as just about medals and scholarships. But when a girl alleges she was assaulted during a wrestling match, it becomes impossible to frame this as purely about inclusion. It forces people to reckon with what happens in locker rooms and contact sports when you erase sex-based boundaries.
Why is Vermont such a flashpoint? It seems like a small state.
Vermont is symbolic. The state doubled down on its transgender policies even after the Supreme Court ruling. A Christian school forfeited a basketball game rather than compete against a transgender athlete, got banned from all state competitions, and had to sue to get back in. The state paid $566,000 in damages. That's expensive defiance, and it shows how far some states are willing to go to resist the ruling.
What do these athletes actually want to happen next?
They want state legislatures to pass laws protecting girls' sports based on biological sex. They want the NCAA and other institutions to be held accountable for the scholarships and opportunities girls lost under old policies. And they want the media and the public to understand this isn't about fairness in competition—it's about safety and equal opportunity under Title IX.
Is there real backlash against the athletes speaking out?
Madison Kenyon said she received some hostile messages, but she was flooded with support. She thinks the backlash is real but smaller than it sounds—a loud minority. What keeps her going is knowing that 69% of Americans, according to a 2025 Gallup survey, believe transgender athletes should only compete on teams matching their birth sex.
What happens if states like California and Illinois refuse to change their laws?
Then the litigation continues. The Trump administration's Department of Justice is already suing those states. The legal groups pursuing these cases say they won't stop until they've rooted out what they call gender ideology from the law. It's going to be a state-by-state, courtroom-by-courtroom fight for years.