On September 19, 2025, Defending Education filed an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Little v. Hecox, supporting Title IX’s promise of equal opportunity in education and girls’ and women’s sports. The case concerns Idaho’s law keeping girls’ and women’s sports teams for female athletes. The brief argues that separating male and female students based on biological differences is not discrimination under Title IX or the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. In fact, sex-specific teams are necessary to give female students the same athletic opportunities as male students. Forcing schools to ignore biology and make female students compete against males would undercut Title IX’s main purpose and put female students’ safety, equality, and privacy at risk.
Sarah Parshall Perry, Defending Ed’s Vice President and Legal Fellow said:
“The text, congressional record, and implementing regulations are clear: Title IX was passed to rectify historical inequalities between educational opportunities for men and women. Prior to 1972, women could not attend graduate schools, play school sports, or even attend most four-year colleges. To say that the law actually requires the inclusion of natal men (self-identifying as “transgender girls”) in female athletics is utterly specious. As the Supreme Court has demonstrated in other anti-discrimination cases like Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a law’s plain language matters, and Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination does not include any purported discrimination based on “gender identity” or “transgender status.” Congress could have amended Title IX to include those categories, but did not. We look forward to the Supreme Court’s ultimate resolution of the litigation in favor of women’s safety and educational equality.”
Read the full brief below:
