Idaho, WVa AGs predict ruling in SCOTUS case on trans athletes in women’s sports

The attorneys common main the authorized protection in opposition to “Save Girls’s Sports activities” within the ongoing Supreme Courtroom battle over trans athletes have optimistic expectations for the upcoming ruling.

Oral arguments Tuesday left most consultants believing {that a} majority of justices seem prepared to rule in favor of Idaho and West Virginia’s proper to implement legal guidelines to maintain males out of girls’s sports activities.

Idaho AG Raul Labrador and West Virginia AG John McCuskey additionally count on a win, albeit on totally different phrases. McCuskey boldly said that he expects the court docket to make a unanimous 9-0 determination in favor of his state.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM

Feminine athletes who’re events to the case converse exterior the U.S. Supreme Courtroom after justices heard arguments difficult state bans on transgender athletes in girls’s sports activities on January 13, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Oliver Contreras/AFP)

“All of us totally count on this to be a 9-0 determination. We’re proper concerning the information. We’re proper concerning the Structure. We’re proper about public opinion, however extra importantly, we’re proper about frequent sense. And these are the sorts of points that even conservatives and liberals can agree on,” McCuskey mentioned at a information convention Monday.

“I do not go into an argument pondering I’ll lose anybody. And so our mission and our objective is to verify this case is set in our favor. And we imagine very, very strongly in our mission and our objective to verify this case is set in our favor. So we’re in search of a 9-0 determination and we really feel superb about it.”

Labrador, nevertheless, is just not so optimistic, suggesting some liberal justices will rule in opposition to his facet whereas nonetheless predicting a victory.

“We’re very optimistic concerning the determination. At instances I even felt like we may get a 9-0 determination and I do not suppose that is going to occur,” Labrador instructed Fox Information Digital after the listening to on Tuesday. “However I simply hope the judges take a look at the frequent sense points introduced earlier than the court docket in the present day and rule in our favor.”

THE SCOTUS HEARING WILL BE A TURNING POINT IN THE CULTURE WAR OVER TRANS ATHLETES IN WOMEN’S SPORTS

Judges Kentaji Brown-Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor made questions and statements in the course of the listening to that would point out they’ll rule in favor of the trans athlete plaintiffs.

Throughout the listening to’s opening arguments, Brown-Jackson pressed Idaho Lawyer Basic Alan Hurst concerning the state legislation geared toward defending ladies’ and girls’s sports activities.

“I believe I am struggling to know how one can say this invoice would not classify primarily based on transgender standing,” Jackson instructed Hurst. “The legislation is expressly geared toward guaranteeing that transgender girls can not play on feminine sports activities groups. Why is that not a classification primarily based on transgender standing?”

Choose Clarence Thomas was seen slouching in his chair along with his hand over his face throughout this query by Brown-Jackson, as witnessed by Fox Information Digital within the courtroom. There have been different moments in the course of the listening to when Thomas was seen in the identical pose.

Hurst responded to Jackson, arguing that Idaho’s Equity in Girls’s Sports activities Act trusted a scholar athlete’s intercourse, not transgender standing.

Jackson continued to press Hurst, asking, “However transgender girls are handled in a different way than cis girls, proper?”

In a separate case, Jackson requested West Virginia Lawyer Basic Michael Williams comparable questions on his state’s Save Girls’s Sports activities Act.

“You might have the umbrella classification — everybody has to play on the workforce that’s the similar as their gender at start — however then you might have a gender id definition that operates inside that, which suggests a distinction, which signifies that for cisgender ladies they’ll play persistently with their gender id. For transgender ladies, that is not doable,” Jackson mentioned.

In the meantime, Sotomayor cited an estimated 2.8 million folks within the US who establish as transgender, saying their rights needs to be revered though they signify a small share of the inhabitants.

“What’s a share sufficient?” Sotomayor requested. “There are 2.8 million transgender folks in the USA. That is an awfully giant quantity. … What makes a subclass significant to you? Is it one p.c? 5 p.c? Thirty p.c? Fifteen p.c?

“The numbers do not discuss folks.”

‘SAVE WOMEN’S SPORTS’ ACTIVISTS RESPOND TO SUPREME COURT HEARING FOR TRANS ATHLETES

Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson (Getty Pictures)

Labrador instructed Fox Information Digital after the listening to that he was stunned by the liberal justices who “struggled” with sure questions.

“I used to be really stunned how the judges, who I assume aren’t going to be very pleasant to our facet, actually struggled with the questions that we put earlier than the court docket, they usually tried to discover a method to articulate the opposite facet’s place, and even they’d problem articulating the opposite facet’s place.”

If latest selections concerning trans rights are any indication, a 9-0 determination can be a tricky promote, however a positive rule for West Virginia and Idaho remains to be seemingly.

In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Courtroom, in a 6-3 determination dated June 18, 2025, upheld Tennessee’s ban on sure gender-affirming medical look after minors. All judges voted in opposition to the celebration political positions, with the six conservative judges voting in favor of upholding the ban and the three liberal judges voting in opposition to.

However in an August 2024 determination on whether or not former President Joe Biden’s administration needs to be granted an emergency movement to implement elements of a brand new rule that features anti-discrimination protections for transgender college students beneath Title IX, the court docket voted simply 5-4 to disclaim the request.

Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented, agreeing with the three liberal justices and the Biden administration that the decrease courts’ rulings have been “overblown.”

The request would have permitted organic males in girls’s restrooms, locker rooms, and dormitories in ten states the place state and native rules are in place to stop this.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

A ruling on this case is anticipated in June on the newest.

Comply with Fox Information Digital’s sports reporting on Xand subscribe to the Fox Information Sports activities Huddle publication.