Supreme Court Issues Rulings on Transgender Sports, Campaign Finance, and Birthright Citizenship

Why it matters locally: The Supreme Court's ruling affirming the legality of laws prohibiting transgender girls and women from participating in female athletics across the nation could have implications for existing or future North Carolina laws or policies regarding athletic participation.

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court concluded its term Friday, releasing decisions on issues ranging from transgender athletes in school sports to campaign finance and birthright citizenship. The day's proceedings included the announcements of opinions in several high-profile cases. Solicitor General D. John Sauer and Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris were among the officials from the U.S. solicitor general’s office present for the opinion announcements. Sauer had argued *Trump v. Barbara*, the birthright citizenship case. Harris argued *National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission*, involving coordinated political spending limits. Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch were absent from the bench. Gorsuch had a scheduled book event for his children’s book, *Heroes of 1776*, at George Washington’s Mount Vernon estate. Chief Justice John Roberts announced Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered the opinion in *West Virginia v. B.P.J.* and the consolidated case, addressing laws barring transgender girls and women from female athletics. Kavanaugh discussed Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded educational programs. Kavanaugh stated that Title IX permits schools to offer separate women’s and men’s sports teams based on biological sex. He affirmed West Virginia’s law maintaining female sports for “biological females” as consistent with the statute. Both state cases also raised questions under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. Kavanaugh emphasized that competitive sports are “zero sum.” He stated that allowing a biological male athlete to compete on a girls’ team displaces or disadvantages a female athlete. He also noted that affected transgender student-athletes are teenagers who want to play sports and their desire to compete warrants respect. Justices Clarence Thomas and Gorsuch filed concurring opinions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Jackson also filed her own opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Sotomayor agreed with the majority regarding Title IX on narrower grounds. Her dissent focused on the equal protection question for the West Virginia transgender athlete, identified as B.P.J. Sotomayor stated no lower court had ruled on whether transgender female athletes, like B.P.J., who did not go through male puberty, have an athletic advantage. She described the majority's opinion as “unencumbered by fact or law,” and said it extends sympathy to cisgender females while inflicting hardship on others. Kavanaugh also delivered the opinion in *National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC*, summarizing the case for 10 minutes. This decision involved overturning a 2001 precedent, *Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee*, a case where Justice Thomas had written a dissenting opinion. Justice Kagan filed a dissent, joined by Sotomayor and Jackson. Chief Justice Roberts then announced he had the opinion in *Trump v. Barbara*, the birthright citizenship case. Roberts began by discussing the history of citizenship in the United States, tracing it through English common law and the American Revolution. He noted the 1899 case, *United States v. Wong Kim Ark*, confirms that children born in the United States and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” satisfy both elements of the citizenship clause. Roberts concluded his announcement of the birthright citizenship decision by stating, “we break no new ground today.” Justice Jackson filed a concurring opinion, joined in part by Sotomayor. Kavanaugh filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Justice Thomas filed a dissent joined by Gorsuch, and Alito and Gorsuch each filed separate dissents. Roberts then moved to closing ceremonies, recognizing retiring employees from the Supreme Court. Marshal Gail Curley concluded the session.