NEWYou can now listen to Pakinomist articles!
Lawyers for Lindsay Hecox, the transgender athlete at the center of an impending Supreme Court battle over the protections of women’s sports, have responded after a federal judge ruled against Hecox’s attempt to have the case dismissed.
Hecox originally filed the lawsuit in 2020 to block an Idaho state law, HB 500, which prohibits men from competing in women’s sports, from competing for the Boise State women’s cross country team. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in July along with a similar case in West Virginia involving a trans athlete, West Virginia v. BPJ
Hecox then tried to have the case against Idaho and Gov. Brad Little dropped in September.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON Pakinomist
Hecox’s attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Cooley, LLP and Legal Voice provided a statement to Pakinomist Digital after US District Judge David Nye denied the trans athlete’s motion to dismiss the case on Tuesday.
“Lindsay terminated her participation in all women’s athletic programs covered by HB 500 to prioritize completing her degree at Boise State and her personal safety and well-being. Lindsay withdrew her challenge to Idaho’s HB 500 and it remains unchanged,” the statement read. “IN West Virginia v. BPJthe US Supreme Court will address a challenge to a nearly identical law. We will continue to advocate for the rights of all women and girls, including transgender women and girls.”
When Hecox originally filed the suit in 2020, the trans athlete was joined by an anonymous female biological student, Jane Doe, who was concerned about the potential of being exposed to the verification process for the sex dispute. The challenge was successful when a federal judge blocked Idaho’s state law.
INSIDE GAVIN NEWSOM’S TRANSGENDER VOLLEYBALL CRISIS
Protesters for and against gender-affirming care for transgender minors demonstrate outside the Supreme Court on December 4, 2024 in Washington, DC (Jose Luis Magana/Associated Press file)
A 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld a ban blocking the state law in 2023 before the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case back in July. Hecox then asked SCOTUS last month to drop the challenge, arguing that the athlete “has therefore decided to permanently retire and refrain from playing women’s sports at BSU or in Idaho.”
Former Idaho State University cross country and track runner Madison Kenyon volunteered to join the list of defendants in Little v. Hecox along with Little after having to compete against a trans athlete her freshman year in 2019.
“My coach sat us down in the room and told us we were going to compete against a male athlete at a certain meet and just let us know. And I remember sitting there and kind of looking around the room and going, ‘Well, what do my teammates think about this? What do we do?'” Kenyon previously told Pakinomist Digital. “So for us, it wasn’t a question of whether I should compete or not. I’m going to put everything out there that I have and see what happens. And sure enough, this male athlete beat me, beat all my teammates, and it continued to happen all season. So that’s when I said, ‘This isn’t fair.'”
Hecox’s efforts to have the case dismissed are not quite over, as SCOTUS still has to rule on whether the case is moot. But Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador, who is leading the defense against Hecox, believes Nye’s decision is a “good sign” for their efforts to take the case to the nation’s highest court and obtain a landmark verdict.
Labrador previously said he hopes the Supreme Court makes a decision with a broader impact than simply letting a state carry out its own specific law on the issue. He wants a new national precedent.
“I believe that’s what they’re going to do,” Labrador previously told Pakinomist Digital in an exclusive interview. “I think they will have a big ruling on whether men can participate in women’s sports, and more importantly, how to decide whether transgender individuals are protected by the federal constitution and state and federal laws.”
