A federal judge denied an effort from a left-wing group to toss a lawsuit over Idaho’s law restricting women’s sports to biological females, as the case is slated to be argued before the Supreme Court later this term.
The American Civil Liberties Union attempted to dismiss the case voluntarily, claiming Lindsay Hecox, a female-identifying biological male who is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, wanted to end the challenge after vowing not to attempt to participate in women’s sports for Hecox’s remaining time at Boise State University. U.S. District Judge David Nye denied the bid to dismiss the case, arguing it would leave the case’s “critical questions in limbo” before the top appellate court in the country could offer answers.
“While a Plaintiff is the master of his or her complaint, the Plaintiff is still bound by principles of fairness and economy. The State of Idaho has defended this case vigorously for years. It would be fundamentally unfair to abandon the issue now on the eve of a final resolution,” Nye said.
“The Court does not mean to romanticize the issue, but Hecox (and similarly situated individuals), as well as the citizens of Idaho, deserve to have these important legal questions answered,” he added.
The Supreme Court is slated to hear two cases involving state laws restricting women’s sports to biological females, with Little v. Hecox pertaining to whether Idaho’s law violates the 14th Amendment. The other case the high court has agreed to hear is B.P.J. v. West Virginia State Board of Education, which deals with whether a similar West Virginia law violates Title IX or the Equal Protection Clause.
Nye did consider that the Supreme Court would hear the West Virginia case, but ultimately argued that the cases have enough differences that the Idaho case should not be tossed.
“[W]hile the West Virginia case will, by all accounts, continue before the Supreme Court, the two states’ laws and the two cases are slightly different. Simply put, the parties and the public have a vested interest in finality on the issues presented in this case,” Nye wrote.
The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative law firm that assisted Idaho in petitioning the high court to hear the case, claimed the ACLU and Hecox only attempted to dismiss the case because the Supreme Court had agreed to hear it. That created a risk that the justices could set a precedent that effectively ends the fight for biological males to play on women’s sports teams.
ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of Appellate Advocacy John Bursch said they were “pleased” with Nye’s ruling to keep the case alive.
“Women and girls deserve to compete on a level playing field. But activists continue their quest to erase differences between men and women by forcing schools to allow men to compete in women’s sports. This contradicts biological reality and common sense. That’s why we are pleased the district court rejected the attempt to end this case before it is argued before the U.S. Supreme Court,” Bursch said.
“The Constitution and Title IX allow states to protect women and girls by reserving women’s sports for women. We are eager to soon stand alongside the state of Idaho in arguing this case before the high court and urging it to listen to the countless girls across the country speaking out on this issue and restore fairness and safety for female athletes,” he added.
SUPREME COURT ASKED TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER SCHOOLS CAN SECRETLY TRANSITION STUDENTS
The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider the ACLU’s suggestion of mootness during a closed-door conference on Friday, but with the district court rejecting the bid to dismiss the case, it is unlikely the justices will declare the lawsuit moot.
The two transgender sports cases are expected to be argued before the high court between December and April 2026, with decisions in both expected before the end of June 2026.
