“The challengers argued that there’s a “subset” of “birth-sex males” who shouldn’t be excluded from girls’ sports because they don’t possess all the physical advantages of normal males. The conservative justices appeared unconvinced by this hair-splitting definition of convenience.”
(Nate Jackson – The Patriot Post) Can Idaho and West Virginia, and, by extension, 27 other states, define sports based on sex? That’s essentially the question the Supreme Court considered during yesterday’s oral arguments, and it certainly seemed likely that the Court would side with reason, science, and morality, as well as protect women’s sports from males pretending to be females.
Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog lays out the background of the two cases (Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J.), though I will make a couple of key edits for clarity and truth:
Idaho adopted its law in 2020; West Virginia followed one year later. Lindsay Hecox, now 24 years old, went to federal court in Idaho to challenge that state’s law. Hecox is a transgender woman man who wanted to be able to try out for the women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University; she he did not make those teams but later played club sports.
The conservative voice and Christian content are being silenced more and more. CRN offers a lifeline to conservative people of faith who are disgusted with social media and the leftmedia for failing to report, even blocking, important news stories that don’t comport with the far left’s narrative. CRN does charge for subscriptions. Sign up HERE (right side of page) to receive news and commentary.