The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that states may ban biological males from competing in women's and girls' sports at publicly funded schools, settling one of the most contentious questions in American education policy. But in 23 states that lack such protections, the decision exposed a glaring gap, and when Fox News Digital contacted every governor's office in those states to ask where they stand, the overwhelming response was silence.
Only four of the 23 offices replied. The rest, a roster that includes some of the most prominent Democratic governors in the country, declined to answer or simply ignored the question. For female athletes in those states, the message is hard to miss: your governor doesn't want to talk about this.
The ruling, authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, consolidated two cases, West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, and held that "sex" under Title IX refers to biological sex, not gender identity. All six Republican-nominated justices joined the majority. The decision validated laws already on the books in 27 states restricting women's sports to biological females.
Kavanaugh's opinion left little room for ambiguity. As National Review reported, the majority wrote:
"The term sex in Title IX, the Javits Amendment, and the Title IX regulations cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex."
The Court went further, addressing the constitutional dimension. States that maintain women's sports for biological females do not violate the Equal Protection Clause. The vote on that question split 6-3 along ideological lines, with all three dissenting justices, notably, all women, objecting.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in dissent, argued that "we just simply do not know scientifically that transgender students pose dangers," as AP News reported. The majority was unpersuaded, writing that the plaintiffs' scientific premise "is the subject of ongoing medical and scientific debate and is not settled in their direction at this time."
Kavanaugh also rejected the argument that the 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County ruling on Title VII workplace protections should extend to school athletics. "Title VII and Bostock are not relevant in this very different statutory and factual context of sports," he wrote.
The bottom line, in the Court's own words: "The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women's and girls' sports throughout America."
This term has been one of the most consequential in recent memory. The Court has also delivered a trio of 6-3 immigration rulings and tackled questions ranging from birthright citizenship to Fed independence.
Fox News Digital reached out to all 23 governors who preside over states without legislative bans on transgender athletes in girls' sports. Nineteen offices did not respond. The list of non-responders reads like a who's who of blue-state leadership: Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, Kathy Hochul of New York, Maura Healey of Massachusetts, Wes Moore of Maryland, Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey, Bob Ferguson of Washington, Tina Kotek of Oregon, Jared Polis of Colorado, and Ned Lamont of Connecticut, among others.
Tim Walz of Minnesota, whose state is being sued by the Department of Justice after a transgender pitcher led a girls' softball team to a state championship in 2025, also said nothing. Neither did Janet Mills of Maine, whose state faces its own DOJ lawsuit and whose public dispute with President Trump at the White House over these policies made national news in early 2025.
Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Tony Evers of Wisconsin were also silent, despite both states seeing their athletic associations move to restrict transgender participation in recent months. Evers has vetoed legislative attempts to codify girls' sports protections in Wisconsin law.
The silence is a political choice. These governors are caught between a progressive base that treats any restriction as bigotry and a public that overwhelmingly supports fair competition for female athletes. Rather than pick a side, they picked the phone-off-the-hook option.
California's response was the most defiant. A spokesperson for Governor Gavin Newsom told Fox News Digital:
"The Supreme Court's decision does not affect California's laws. The state remains committed to ensuring every Californian, including the LGBTQ community, is met with dignity and respect."
Newsom's office went further, providing a list of his administration's record on transgender policy, including "making it easier to update gender markers on official documents" and having "appointed multiple trans judges." The office noted that California passed AB 1266 in 2013 under then-Governor Jerry Brown, which explicitly protects the right of transgender students to participate in school athletic teams consistent with their gender identity.
That law is now at the center of a DOJ lawsuit. The federal government is suing California after a transgender athlete identified as AB Hernandez won a pair of girls' state championships in 2025 and followed with back-to-back titles in 2026. Newsom's office treated the ruling as irrelevant to California. The DOJ apparently disagrees.
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker responded by linking to a post on X, where he wrote:
"Going after LGBTQ+ kids isn't leadership, it's bullying. Today's decision is a setback for equality in this nation where every student deserves to learn and belong, no matter their gender. To those in the LGBTQ+ community, know that there's a place for you in Illinois."
The Illinois High School Association handles transgender athlete participation through a formal policy requiring students to submit documentation to their school to compete in accordance with their gender identity. No state law bars biological males from girls' teams.
Hawaii's Department of Education offered a more measured response, stating that the state "will continue to implement its athletics policies in accordance with state law" and that the Supreme Court's decision "does not change our current policies or practices." Hawaii allows participation based on gender identity under broader anti-discrimination statutes.
The loaded Supreme Court docket this term has forced governors across the country to reckon with a judiciary that is no longer deferring to progressive assumptions about sex and gender.
The most substantive response came from Nevada's Republican Governor Joe Lombardo, who treated the ruling as a mandate for action. Lombardo told Fox News Digital:
"Today's decision by the United States Supreme Court provides important legal clarity and affirms that states have the authority to protect fair competition in girls' sports. Nevadans overwhelmingly believe that female athletes deserve a level playing field and the opportunity to compete against other biological females."
Lombardo announced he would ask the Nevada Legislature to address the issue during the 2027 legislative session, adding that "this is no longer a question clouded by legal uncertainty. It is an opportunity for the Legislature to provide a permanent, common-sense solution that reflects both the law and the will of Nevada voters."
He closed with a call for bipartisan cooperation: "I remain committed to protecting opportunities for female athletes while treating every Nevadan with dignity and respect. I urge lawmakers from both parties to come together and finally settle this issue for our students, our schools, and Nevada families."
Lombardo's approach stands in sharp contrast to the governors who refused to engage at all.
The 23 states without legislative bans present a patchwork of policies, most of them tilted toward allowing biological males to compete in girls' sports. Some operate through state athletic association rules. Others rely on broader anti-discrimination statutes. A few have begun shifting under federal pressure.
New York protects transgender athletes under the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, or GENDA, and its state athletic association allows students to play on teams matching their gender identity. Connecticut's Interscholastic Athletic Conference allows transgender participation "without restrictions." New Jersey's athletic association allows it without even requiring medical documentation.
Massachusetts, Maryland, Delaware, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and New Mexico all maintain similar policies through their respective athletic associations, each explicitly allowing participation based on gender identity. Michigan evaluates cases individually but lacks a statewide ban.
Colorado presents a unique situation. The state currently protects transgender athletes' right to compete, but a November 2026 ballot measure could mandate that teams be organized by biological sex, putting the question directly to voters.
The broader pattern of officials choosing to defy or sidestep Supreme Court rulings is not limited to this issue, but it is especially visible here.
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin shifted their athletic association policies before the Court even ruled. Pennsylvania's Interscholastic Athletic Association removed its inclusive "Transgender Policy" in early 2025 and amended its rules to reference biological sex rather than gender identity. The change applies to member schools that receive federal funding.
Wisconsin's Interscholastic Athletic Association went further in February 2025, mandating that only students designated female at birth may participate in girls' competitions. The policy explicitly aligned with federal directives and functions as an agency-level ban, even though Governor Evers has blocked legislative action on the issue.
Alaska's School Activities Association adopted a similar policy in 2023, barring transgender girls from competing in high school girls' sports at the request of the state's board of education. Virginia's Department of Education, under then-Governor Glenn Youngkin, issued model policies in 2023 requiring participation based on biological sex at birth, though enforcement falls to individual school districts. Those policies have continued under current Governor Abigail Spanberger, whose office did not respond to Fox News Digital's inquiry.
The Trump administration's Department of Justice has not waited for state legislatures to act. Federal lawsuits are now pending against California, Minnesota, and Maine, three states that have allowed high-profile cases of biological males competing in and winning girls' championships.
In California, the DOJ suit targets the state's handling of AB Hernandez's consecutive girls' state titles. In Minnesota, the case centers on a transgender pitcher who led a girls' softball team to a state championship in 2025. Maine faces a suit over its policies, which are reinforced by the state's human rights act.
Mark Trammell, CEO of the Center for American Liberty, framed the ruling's significance in clear terms, as Just The News reported: "The notion that Title IX would require states to include men in women's sports has been dispelled. States should feel clearheaded protecting women's sports knowing the law is on their side."
The Washington Examiner noted that the majority opinion explicitly left open the question of whether schools may voluntarily allow biological males who identify as female to participate on girls' teams, a matter subject to ongoing lower court litigation. That gap is exactly where the 23 holdout states now sit.
The 6-3 decision removes any legal cloud over the 27 states that already protect girls' sports. But it does not compel the remaining 23 to follow suit.
This Court term has repeatedly demonstrated that the justices are willing to draw clear constitutional lines, as seen in recent rulings on immigration enforcement and federal authority. The question now is whether governors and state legislatures will act on the clarity the Court has provided, or keep dodging the question while girls lose scholarships, records, and roster spots to biological males.
Nineteen governors chose not to answer a straightforward question about whether girls in their states deserve fair competition. That is not neutrality. It is a decision to let the status quo, biological males in girls' locker rooms, on girls' teams, on girls' podiums, continue unchallenged.
The Supreme Court has now made the legal path clear. States can protect female athletes without violating the Constitution or Title IX. The only thing standing in the way in those 23 states is political will, and the governors who won't return a reporter's phone call have told you everything you need to know about where theirs stands.
