← All Cases

West Virginia v. B.P.J.

No. 24-43 SCOTUS · Decided Decided SCOTUS

Cert Granted: Jul 3, 2025 Argued: Jan 13, 2026 Decided: Jun 30, 2026

📄 Read the Opinion

This decision was issued in conjunction with Little v. Hecox

Decision

Opinion Kavanaugh

Concurrence Thomas, J.

Concurrence Gorsuch, J.

Dissent Sotomayor, J. (joined by Kagan and Jackson, JJ.) (concurring in judgment in part and dissenting in part)

Dissent Jackson, J. (concurring in judgment in part and dissenting in part)

Opinion of the Court

Kavanaugh

The Facts

West Virginia enacted H.B. 3293, the Save Women's Sports Act, prohibiting transgender girls from competing on girls' sports teams in public schools. B.P.J., a transgender girl who has taken puberty blockers and estrogen since childhood, participated on a middle school girls' cross-country and track team and brought a Title IX and Equal Protection challenge. The Fourth Circuit ruled in her favor, and the case was consolidated with Little v. Hecox to resolve the circuit split.

The Issue

Whether state laws excluding transgender girls from girls' sports teams violate Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; and whether such laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Rules

20 U.S.C. § 1681 Title IX — prohibition on sex discrimination in education

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1 Equal Protection Clause

No state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

590 U.S. 644 (2020) Bostock v. Clayton County — sex discrimination includes transgender status

Discrimination because of sex under Title VII encompasses discrimination against transgender persons; persuasive authority for Title IX analysis.

518 U.S. 515 (1996) United States v. Virginia — intermediate scrutiny

Sex-based government classifications must be supported by an exceedingly persuasive justification.

The Application

West Virginia's Position

West Virginia argues its law classifies on biological sex — a legitimate basis for organizing athletics. Title IX expressly permits 'reasonable provisions considering the nature of particular sports.' The 1972 Congress understood 'sex' as biological sex, and Bostock's Title VII reasoning does not extend to Title IX's different regulatory structure and legislative history.

B.P.J.'s Position

B.P.J., a 15-year-old who has never experienced male puberty and has been on puberty blockers since childhood, argues the categorical exclusion has no relationship to competitive fairness in her case. A law must be substantially related to its stated purpose. Excluding someone with female physiology from girls' sports serves no fairness interest and stigmatizes her.

At the Supreme Court

Argued January 13, 2026. The Court will likely uphold the ban and hold that Title IX does not prevent states from maintaining sex-separate sports based on biological sex. The Skrmetti precedent (2025) heavily favors West Virginia. Justice Kagan explored an as-applied middle path for individuals without male-puberty physiology, but it likely won't command a majority.