Arizona House Republicans are asking the nation's highest court to weigh in on one of the most contentious issues in youth athletics today.
In a news release, House Speaker Steve Montenegro announced that Republican lawmakers from both chambers have submitted legal documents to the U.S. Supreme Court supporting women's sports laws in Idaho and West Virginia.
Like the laws in Idaho and West Virginia, the goal of Arizona’s proposal is to restrict participation in women’s sports based on a person’s sex assigned at birth.
If passed, it would likely face legal challenges, just like Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., which the U.S. Supreme Court is now reviewing.
In those cases, opponents argue that these laws are discriminatory and violate both the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX. This federal law protects students from sex-based discrimination in education.
Arizona's Own Legal Battle
The move comes as Arizona continues fighting for its own controversial legislation. In 2022, then-Governor Doug Ducey signed the "Save Women's Sports Act" into law, which requires school sports teams to be divided based on participants' biological sex and bars students assigned male at birth from competing on female-designated teams.
However, the law has faced significant legal challenges. Arizona's own Attorney General Kris Mayes has declined to defend the legislation, leaving Republican lawmakers to step in and handle the court battles themselves.
"Arizona passed the Save Women's Sports Act to keep competition fair for girls," Steve Montenegro noted. "It's unacceptable that our state's top lawyer refuses to defend that law. While Attorney General Mayes stands aside, House Republicans are doing the job she won't—standing up for Arizona's daughters and every female athlete who trains and competes."
Court Setbacks
The Arizona law has hit roadblocks in federal court. Last year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals maintained an injunction against the law, ruling it discriminatory and in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The court's decision specifically addressed two transgender girls involved in the lawsuit.
Importantly, the appeals court noted that significant athletic differences between boys and girls typically don't appear until after puberty. The judges also found that preventing transgender girls from playing on teams matching their gender identity constituted discrimination.
Despite these setbacks, Montenegro remains optimistic about the Supreme Court's potential involvement.
"The Ninth Circuit sidelined our law; I'm confident the Supreme Court will correct course and affirm what parents and coaches know: girls' sports are for girls," he stated.
The Broader Impact
The news release states that federal court interference has already negatively affected female athletes in the state, resulting in lost opportunities for placements, roster positions, and playing time.
The lawmakers insist that elected officials, rather than athletic organizations or courts, should establish participation standards for school sports.
"Girls deserve a level playing field," Montenegro emphasized. "House Republicans will continue to vigorously defend Arizona's law and support states working to keep girls' sports fair and safe."
The Supreme Court cases could establish nationwide precedent on whether states can restrict sports participation based on biological sex, potentially affecting millions of student athletes across the country.
Currently, the two transgender athletes involved in Arizona's case are allowed to continue competing on girls' teams while the legal proceedings continue.
