WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Supreme Court’s recent hearing on state bans restricting transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports sparked a wave of reactions from activists involved in the “Save Women’s Sports” movement, including prominent athletes Payton McNabb and Stephanie Turner. The hearing, which took place on January 13, 2026, examined the constitutionality of laws that prohibit biological males from participating in female sports categories, a contentious issue that has drawn national attention.
Those aligned with the movement expressed cautious optimism that the Court’s majority may uphold the bans, citing the justices’ pointed questions and legal scrutiny during arguments. “The hearing felt like a pivotal moment for fairness and safety in women’s athletics,” McNabb told reporters outside the Supreme Court. Turner, who has competed against biological males in collegiate sports, echoed that sentiment but also voiced concern over the tone and terminology used by some justices during the session.
The debate centers on whether state laws that restrict transgender athletes violate Title IX protections or constitutional rights. The Department of Education recently launched multiple probes under Title IX concerning these laws, underscoring the federal government’s active role in the issue. Advocates for the bans argue that allowing biological males to compete in women’s sports undermines competitive fairness and opportunities for female athletes.
During the hearing, attorneys representing the “Save Women’s Sports” coalition challenged arguments presented by the American Civil Liberties Union, which contended that sex should not be narrowly defined in the context of sports eligibility. John Bursch, an attorney for the coalition, sharply criticized the ACLU’s stance, emphasizing the importance of biological sex distinctions in preserving women’s sports. The exchange highlighted the deep legal and cultural divisions surrounding the issue.
Outside the courthouse, dozens of activists rallied in support of the bans, holding signs and sharing personal stories about competing against transgender athletes. Some described the hearing as “chaotic” due to the complex legal arguments and the justices’ probing questions, which at times appeared to reflect differing views on how to balance inclusion with fairness. The Supreme Court’s official docket shows that the case could set a landmark precedent affecting sports policies nationwide.
The hearing also drew attention from lawmakers, with several members of Congress commenting on the importance of protecting women’s sports. Meanwhile, critics warn that upholding the bans could infringe on the rights of transgender individuals and exacerbate discrimination. The Department of Health and Human Services has previously issued guidance emphasizing nondiscrimination, adding another layer of complexity to the legal battle.
As the Court deliberates, female athletes and advocates remain divided between hope for a ruling that safeguards women’s competitive opportunities and apprehension about the broader implications for transgender rights. The decision, expected later this year, will likely influence policies at the high school, collegiate, and professional levels.
For ongoing coverage of this issue and other sports-related legal developments, visit Fox News Sports and the Supreme Court’s website.
