Skip to content
Project Curia
Supreme Court decisions
No. 24-43Jun 30, 2026EducationReversed and remanded

The question

Whether Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause permit schools to maintain women's and girls' sports teams defined by biological sex.

West Virginia v. B. P. J.

What the Court decided

The Court reversed the Fourth and Ninth Circuits and remanded, upholding West Virginia's and Idaho's laws that restrict female sports teams to biological females. Title IX allows schools to provide separate men's and women's teams defined by biological sex. The Equal Protection Clause does not bar States from maintaining female teams for biological females, because laws separating teams by biological sex are subject to intermediate scrutiny and satisfy it by serving the important governmental interest of promoting equal athletic opportunities for women and girls.

How the justices split

6-3
In favor 6Against 3
Kavanaugh
Roberts
Thomas
Alito
Gorsuch
Barrett
Sotomayor
Kagan
Jackson

The Court's opinion

Kavanaugh, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett

Title IX permits schools to provide separate women's and men's sports teams defined by biological sex, and West Virginia permissibly maintained female sports for biological females. The Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit States from maintaining female teams for biological females, because laws separating teams by biological sex are subject to intermediate scrutiny and satisfy it by serving the important governmental interest of promoting equal athletic opportunities for women and girls.

Concurring

Thomas, writing alone

Thomas joined the Court's opinion and wrote separately to add his own reasoning.

Concurring

Gorsuch, writing alone

Gorsuch joined the Court's opinion and wrote separately to add his own reasoning.

Dissenting in part and in the judgment

Sotomayor, joined by Kagan, Jackson

Sotomayor concurred in the judgment in part and dissented in part, agreeing with the outcome only in part and disagreeing with the Court's resolution of the Title IX and Equal Protection questions in the remaining part.

Dissenting in part and in the judgment

Jackson, writing alone

Jackson concurred in the judgment in part and dissented in part in a separate opinion, agreeing with the outcome only in part and disagreeing with the Court's reasoning in the remaining part.

How we know · 5 sourced claims
  • The Court reversed the judgments of both the Fourth Circuit and the Ninth Circuit and remanded the cases.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The Court held that Title IX allows schools to provide separate women's and men's sports teams defined by biological sex.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The Court held that laws separating sports teams by biological sex are subject to intermediate scrutiny and satisfy it by serving the important governmental interest of promoting equal athletic opportunities for women and girls.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

  • Sotomayor filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, joined by Kagan and Jackson, and Jackson also filed a separate opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

Read the opinion on supremecourt.gov