A federal appeals court on Sept. 9 upheld a lower court ruling that blocked the enforcement of an Arizona state law banning boys identifying as transgender from playing on girls’ sports teams in schools.
This ruling followed a lawsuit filed last year by two transgender-identifying plaintiffs challenging Arizona’s “Save Women’s Sports Act,” alleging that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A federal judge in Tucson granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction in July last year.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on Sept. 9, upholding the lower court’s preliminary injunction against an Arizona law that barred them from participating in their chosen school sports teams.
In a 55-page decision, the three-judge panel agreed with the district court’s finding that boys who take puberty-blocking medication “do not have an athletic advantage” over girls.
The panel also determined that Arizona’s transgender sports ban was discriminatory on its face. Circuit Judge Morgan Christen said the state law has “a profound impact” on transgender individuals.
Christen said that the state law was discriminatory because it allows women and girls to play on any sports teams, male or female, while boys who identify as transgender are allowed to play only on male teams.
In response to inquiries, Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, named as a defendant in the case, said the Ninth Circuit is “very left wing.”
“We expect this to reach the U.S. Supreme Court and be victorious there,” Horne told The Epoch Times.
Horne said that boys should not be competing against girls in school sports.
“If there really are no differences between males and females, then all sports would already be co-ed,” he said.
According to the court filing, the two plaintiffs include a 15-year-old student at the Gregory School in Tucson and an 11-year-old student at Kyrene Aprende Middle School in Chandler. Both are receiving medical treatments for gender dysphoria and have not gone through puberty.
The ruling will allow them to continue playing on girls’ teams while the case proceeds to trial. Rachel Berg, staff attorney at the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which represented the plaintiffs, welcomed the decision.
“We are pleased with the Ninth Circuit’s ruling today, which held that the Arizona law likely violates the Equal Protection Clause and recognizes that a student’s transgender status is not an accurate proxy for athletic ability and competitive advantage,” Berg said in a press release.
The parents of the plaintiffs also praised the court’s decision.
In issuing the preliminary injunction last year, Judge Jennifer G. Zipps said there is no evidence to suggest that boys who have been prescribed puberty blockers for gender dysphoria and “have not undergone male puberty” would have an athletic advantage or prove a safety risk to other players if they play on girls’ teams.
Elizabeth Dowell and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
This report was updated with the Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction’s response.
