The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 20 declined a male college student’s request to withdraw his challenge to Idaho’s ban on male athletes competing on school sports teams intended for females.
The court’s new ruling in Little v. Hecox came without comment in an unsigned order. No justices dissented. Previously, on July 3, the Supreme Court granted Idaho’s petition but has not yet scheduled an oral argument in the case.
Respondent Lindsay Hecox had sued Idaho, alleging that Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act violates the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause and Title IX, a federal civil rights law that forbids sex-based discrimination at any school that receives federal funding.
Hecox, a biological male who identifies with a female identity, wanted to compete as part of the Boise State University women’s teams for track and cross-country.
A federal district court previously issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state law so Hecox could try out for the teams. The court ruled that the statute discriminates against transgender-identifying athletes.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the injunction, holding that laws making sex-based distinctions in schools serve as “proxy discrimination” against transgender-identifying athletes.
However, on Sept. 2, Hecox’s attorneys told the Supreme Court that he wished to abandon his appeal. The case had become too much of a distraction in his life and Hecox had asked the federal district court in which the original lawsuit was still pending to dismiss it.
“Ms. Hecox has also come under negative public scrutiny from certain quarters because of this litigation, and she believes that such continued—and likely intensified—attention in the coming school year will distract her from her schoolwork and prevent her from meeting her academic and personal goals.”
Even though playing women’s sports remains important to Hecox, “her top priority is graduating from college and living a healthy and safe life,” the filing said.
The document said that by filing a notice of voluntary dismissal at the district court level, Hecox terminated the case there, so there is no longer a live claim left to be decided by the courts. The Supreme Court should vacate the Ninth Circuit’s ruling and send the case back to that court with instructions to dismiss the appeal, the brief said.
However, on Oct. 14, U.S. District Judge David Nye of Idaho rejected the request to dismiss Hecox’s lawsuit.
Nye noted it was Hecox’s position that Idaho should be pleased he was attempting to dismiss the suit because doing so would allow the state law to remain in effect.
“But again, if Hecox dismisses this case and the Ninth Circuit’s decision is vacated, what is to prevent another individual from taking up Hecox’s mantel and bringing an identical suit. The parties (and the Court) would be back to square one.”
While it seems likely Hecox won’t “reengage in collegiate sports, she could still change her mind,” the judge said.
Keep reading
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.