NEWYou can now listen to PK Press Club articles!
Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador and the rest of the legal defense seeking to “save women’s sports” have been guaranteed the opportunity to present their oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court after a trans athlete attempted to have a potentially landmark case thrown out.
The Supreme Court on Monday ordered to delay its decision on the trans athlete’s request to have the case dismissed until oral arguments are made.
A federal judge ruled against the trans athlete’s petition last week, but the Supreme Court’s decision would definitively determine whether the case moves forward or not. Now, the case will at least move on to oral arguments, which are expected to take place in January.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON PK Press Club
Trans athlete Lindsay Hecox started the legal battle in 2020. That year, Hecox wanted to join the Boise State women’s cross country team and had the state law blocking trans athletes from competing in women’s sports blocked. Hecox was joined by an anonymous biological student, Jane Doe, who was concerned about the risk of being subjected to the gender dispute screening process.
Hecox’s challenge was successful, as a federal judge blocked the Idaho state law. Then, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an injunction blocking the state law in 2023, before the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in July. The Supreme Court also agreed to hear a similar West Virginia case involving a trans athlete, West Virginia v. BPJ.
Hecox last month asked SCOTUS to drop the challenge, saying the athlete “has therefore decided to permanently withdraw and refrain from playing women’s sports at BSU or Idaho.”
INSIDE GAVIN NEWSOM’S TRANSGENDER VOLLEYBALL CRISIS
Hecox’s attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Cooley, LLP and Legal Voice, provided a statement to PK Press Club Digital.
“Lindsay terminated her participation in all women’s athletic programs covered by HB 500 to prioritize completing her degree at Boise State as well as her personal safety and well-being. Lindsay withdrew her challenge to Idaho’s HB 500 and that remains unchanged. In West Virginia v. BPJ, the U.S. Supreme Court will challenge a law almost identical. We will continue to defend the rights of all women and girls, including transgender women and girls. We look forward to presenting our oral arguments pursuant to the Court’s order,” the statement said.
Meanwhile, Labrador has previously said it hopes the Supreme Court issues a ruling with a broader impact than just letting one state enforce its own specific law on the issue. He wants a new national precedent.
“I believe that’s what they’re going to do,” Labrador told PK Press Club Digital in an exclusive interview. “I think they’re going to have an important decision on whether men can compete in women’s sports and, more importantly, how to determine whether transgender people are protected by the federal constitution and state and federal laws.”
