Supporting Fairness and Inclusion in School Athletics
For years, our firm has been at the forefront of defending transgender rights. We have challenged discriminatory laws and championed the dignity and inclusion of transgender individuals in schools, workplaces, and communities. This commitment continued in West Virginia v. BPJ, a case in which we partnered with a coalition of pediatric endocrinologists and pediatricians to file a friend-of-the-court brief with the Supreme Court of the United States after the state enacted a law barring transgender girls from participating on girls' school sports teams. The filing helped ensure that the voices of medical experts and the lived realities of transgender youth were brought to the Court's attention.
Supporters of the law argued that all transgender girls possess an inherent athletic advantage, justifying blanket exclusion from girls' sports. Relying on decades of clinical experience and scientific consensus, our brief explained why that claim is inconsistent with medical science. Athletic differences between males and females develop during puberty, driven largely by increased testosterone levels. Transgender girls, like BPJ, who begin puberty blockers and hormone therapy at the onset of puberty do not experience these elevated levels of testosterone. Their bodies, hormone levels, and athletic capabilities mirror those of their non-transgender peers, meaning they have no inherent athletic advantages over other girls.
The brief argued that there is no scientific justification for excluding transgender girls who have not experienced male puberty. The evidence shows that prepubescent boys and girls perform similarly in sports, and the "male athletic advantage" is a product of puberty, not birth. We await a decision from the Court and are hopeful that young transgender girls in West Virginia can participate in athletics alongside their classmates.
