A transgender athlete is asking the Supreme Court to dismiss her challenge of Idaho’s ban on biological males in girls’ and women’s sports in its upcoming term.
Lindsay Hecox, a senior at Boise State University, says she no longer wants to participate in sports and has been harassed about her five-year-long legal dispute. She has moved to dismiss the case with prejudice — meaning it cannot be refiled — and notified the Supreme Court, asking the justices to vacate the lower court’s decision and remand the case to the district court for dismissal.
“In the five years since this case commenced, Ms. Hecox has faced significant challenges that have affected her both personally and academically, including an ’illness and her father’s passing’ in 2022 that impeded her ability to focus on her schoolwork and participate in sports,” her filing to the court reads.
The court filing also says she has received “negative public scrutiny from certain quarters because of this litigation.”
As a freshman in 2020, Ms. Hecox challenged Idaho’s House Bill 500, which requires only biological females to play in girls’ sports. She tried out for track and cross country teams after winning an injunction from a lower court but failed to make the teams.
“While playing women’s sports is important to Ms. Hecox, her top priority is graduating from college and living a healthy and safe life,” her court filing reads. “Ms. Hecox has therefore decided to permanently withdraw and refrain from playing any women’s sports at BSU or in Idaho covered by H.B. 500 … Ms. Hecox has firmly committed not to try out for or participate in any school-sponsored women’s sports covered by H.B. 500.”
The state of Idaho has signaled that it opposes Ms. Hecox’s motion to dismiss the case.
In its next term, which begins in October, the Supreme Court is set to consider Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, which bans transgender athletes from competing against girls and women, as well as a similar law from West Virginia.
Both states had appealed to the justices after lower courts blocked their laws on the grounds that they violate the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause by discriminating based on sex.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in April 2024 against West Virginia’s Save Women’s Sports Act, siding with a transgender female athlete.
In the Idaho dispute, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an injunction in June 2024, halting the state’s enforcement of its ban against Ms. Hecox. That law also bases sports participation on biological sex.
Court watchers say the West Virginia case would likely remain on the high court’s docket if the justices agree to remove the Idaho case. The only thing that could change that would be if the West Virginia challenger also moved to dismiss the case, said Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law.
Ilya Shapiro, director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute, said the Idaho challenger may be acting out of concerns she may lose.
“This is a bad-faith effort to get the case off the docket when it’s obvious that it’s much more likely than not that Hecox will lose. But even if this case is dismissed, yes [West Virginia] would continue,” Mr. Shapiro said.
The cases are B.P.J. v. West Virginia State Board of Education and Lindsay Hecox v. Bradley Little, Idaho’s governor.
About two dozen states have similar laws to bar transgender athletes from women’s sports, according to one of Idaho’s court filings.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.