By Shelby Stevens
On May 20, 2025, the non-profit organization Female Athletes United (“FAU”) and several high school athletes (“Plaintiff”) filed suit against Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, the Minnesota Department of Education, and the Minnesota State High School League challenging Minnesota’s state policy that permits transgender students to compete and participate on sports teams that align with their gender identity.
Plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction which District Court Eric Tostrud denied. In his opinion, Judge Tostrud found that FAU had not demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits. He concluded FAU was not convincing in its arguments that Minnesota denied FAU’s athletes’ equal treatment and effective accommodation under Title IX. His decision, along with other federal courts’ decisions, have found that gender-inclusive policies fall squarely within the bounds of Title IX. Following the denial of the preliminary injunction, FAU immediately requested an emergency injunction pending appeal.
The Plaintiff’s arguments center on two core elements: the Minnesota athletic policy violates Title IX by disadvantaging cisgender girls, and transgender girls’ participation undermines fairness and safety in girls’ contact and competitive-skill sports.
The Coalition Steps In
Following Plaintiff’s request for an emergency injunction, 12 state attorneys general, led by Washington State Attorney General Nick Brown, joined forces to support Minnesota Attorney General Ellison in defending the rights of transgender youth to play on sports teams that align with their gender identity.
Attorney General Brown filed an amicus curiae brief on October 31, 2025 with the attorneys general of California, Connecticut, Hawaiʻi, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In support of the brief, Brown says “I believe strongly in protecting the rights of all Washington kids – including transgender youth.” “Equal access to participation in sports is important to kids’ wellbeing, both emotionally and physically, and barring kids from school athletics because of their gender identity perpetuates the kind of discrimination our state has long sought to abolish.”
The Amicus Brief
In their arguments, the amici states outlined that transgender and gender expansive youth continue to face discrimination, threats, harassment, and other challenges. Brief of Amicus Curiae States of Washington, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island & Vermont in Support of Appellees’ Opposition to Appellant’s Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal, Female Athletes United v. Ellison, No. 25-2151 (8th Cir. 2025). The brief highlights that discrimination of gender expansive and transgender youth harm their mental and physical health, as well as educational outcomes.
The brief argues that by permitting transgender and gender expansive youth to participate in athletics, such participation can increase their self-esteem and lower rates of depression and other mental health issues. In support of this argument, the amici states reference U.S. Transgender Surveys, reports, and peer reviewed studies. The coalition and the member states have a long-standing history of protecting transgender and gender-expansive youth. Each of the coalition states have found that by protecting the rights of youth to participate in sports, it creates a welcoming educational and athletic environment for kids. In addition to creating a welcoming educational and athletic environment, the states emphasize that athletic participation is linked to academic achievement and improved academic performance, as well having a positive impact on physical health.
To counter the Plaintiff’s original Title IX arguments, the brief supports the holding of Judge Tostrud and urges the court not to issue the emergency injunction on the grounds that the FAU’s attempt to bar transgender female athletes from participating in sports is “wholly inconsistent with Title IX.” Brief of Amici Curiae States of Wash. et al. at 16., Female Athletes United v. Ellison, No. 25-2151 (8th Cir. 2025). By citing precedent to United States Supreme Court cases and decisions from other federal courts, the coalition argues that courts have recognized that Title IX bar against sex discrimination “encompasses discrimination against transgender students.” Brief of Amici Curiae States of Wash. et al. at 17, Female Athletes United v. Ellison, No. 25-2151 (8th Cir. 2025). The Amici States argue that policies permitting transgender youth to participate in sports do not compromise fairness or reduce opportunities for cisgender athletes. “Granting FAU’s motion would needlessly deny transgender student-athletes something that their cisgender female athletes take for granted: the ability to participate on an athletic team at school with their friends consistent with their lived identity.” Brief of Amici Curiae States of Wash. et al. at 20, Female Athletes United v. Ellison, No. 25-2151 (8th Cir. 2025).
Conclusion
The amicus curiae brief submitted by the coalition of Washington and 12 other states in Female Athletes United v. Ellison provides policy rationales and a challenge to FAU’s emergency injunction request. As the Eighth Circuit has yet to consider whether to grant the injunction, this case will be one to watch as it relates to the future of transgender participation in school athletics.
Shelby Stevens is a civil litigation attorney whose practice includes business compliance, formation, and litigation, as well as residential real estate disputes and intellectual property matters. A 2025 graduate of Gonzaga University School of Law, she also earned a bachelor’s degree from Grand Canyon University in 2020. When not practicing law, Shelby is probably dissecting the latest gymnastics Code of Points or getting overly invested in a book.
