A transgender athlete competing in a women's swimming event [AP=Yonhap News file photo]

On the 30th (local time), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is constitutional to prohibit transgender individuals from participating in women's sports teams at schools.

In the lawsuit filed by 16-year-old transgender high school student Becky Pepper-Jackson and 25-year-old college student Lindsey Hecox against the laws of West Virginia and Idaho, respectively, the Court ruled against the plaintiffs in a 6-3 decision.

The West Virginia law, enacted in 2021, stipulates that gender is "based solely on the individual's reproductive biology and genetics at birth," while the Idaho law, enacted in 2020, states that "athletic teams designated for females shall not be open to students of the male sex."

The Supreme Court majority determined that these state laws do not violate the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law for all, or Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination in education.

This ruling, which overturns lower court decisions, directly applies only to the two states involved in the litigation, but it is expected to have an impact on 27 other states where similar laws or regulations are currently in effect.

According to the website of the Movement Advancement Project (MAP), an American LGBTQ+ advocacy organization, 25 states have laws and two states—Virginia and Alaska—have regulations or institutional policies that prohibit transgender students from participating in sports based on their "gender identity" (referring to a gender identity different from the sex assigned at birth).

President Donald Trump has proposed a plan to implement a nationwide ban on transgender participation in women's sports by including it in the "Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act" (voter ID bill). While this bill passed the House, it has yet to clear the Senate.

President Trump welcomed the ruling on his social media platform, Truth Social, calling it a "huge victory" and stating, "That ridiculous situation (transgender participation in women's sports) is now over."

One of the plaintiffs, Pepper-Jackson, had competed in women's cross-country, shot put, and discus events while undergoing puberty blockers and hormone therapy. The other plaintiff, Hecox, also attempted to join a women's track team while undergoing hormone therapy but was unsuccessful.

U.S. media outlets had anticipated that, given the conservative-leaning composition of the Supreme Court, the ruling would be against the plaintiffs on the grounds that transgender participation in school-based women's sports teams undermines "women's safety" and "fairness."

CNN reported, "The ruling marks a significant defeat for the LGBTQ+ movement," adding, "It comes just one year after the justices allowed states to ban gender-affirming medical care for minors, such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy."

Following last year’s ruling that upheld laws banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth, the Supreme Court ruled earlier this year to block California’s regulations that required school-wide protective policies for transgender students (such as parental notification and pronoun usage).

Additionally, last year, the Court permitted policies from the Trump administration that banned transgender individuals from serving in the military and prevented them from listing their gender identity on their passports.