By Ellen J. Staurowsky, Ed.D., Senior Writer & Professor of Sports Media, Ithaca College, staurows@ithaca.edu
On February 12, 2025, two transgender high school girls who attend public schools in New Hampshire challenged an executive order entitled “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” (National Sports Ban) issued by President Trump that prevents transgender girls and women from participating on teams that match their gender identity (Tirrell & Turmelle v. Engleblut et al., 2025). This represents an expansion of a lawsuit brought by the Plaintiffs in August of 2024 following the enactment by the NH legislature of HB 1204 which prohibited transgender girls from participating on girls’ athletic teams in the state.
Prior to the passage of HB 1204, issues associated with athletic eligibility were left up to the New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association (NHIAA) to regulate. In their oversight capacity, the NHIAA had developed and adopted a “Policy Statement and School Recommendation Regarding Transgender Participation” in 2015 through its Eligibility Committee. In keeping with NHIAA’s educational mission, the Policy had provided for transgender athletes to participate on teams sponsored by NHIAA athletic programs. As per the Policy as it was presented in September of 2024, “It would be fundamentally unjust and contrary to applicable State and Federal law to preclude a student from participation on a gender specific sports team that is consistent with the public gender identity of that student for all other purposes” (Tirrell & Turmelle v. Engleblut et al., 2024, Appendix A – NHIAA Bylaws Article II, p. 54). The NHIAA left it up to school districts to determine a student’s eligibility to play based on “the gender identification of that student in current school records and daily life activities in the school and community…” (Tirrell & Turmelle v. Englebut et al., 2024, Appendix A – NHIAA Bylaws Article II, p. 54).
Initially, the Plaintiffs sought and obtained a temporary restraining order that allowed them to remain eligible while the case proceeded. The Plaintiffs also sought relief under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, arguing that HB 1204 singled them out and categorically barred them from participating on girls’ teams because they were transgender. They further argue that HB 1204 does not meet the heightened scrutiny requirement for classifications based on sex and transgender status because their exclusion cannot be justified as being substantially related to any important state interest. Described as being similarly situated to other girls, both girls had lived their lives and pursued activities as girls throughout their schooling. Neither had undergone male puberty and the basis on which they were being excluded from participation was founded on sex stereotypes and misconceptions. Citing the language from Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, they further argue that prohibitions against the girls having an opportunity to try out for a team and/or participate on a team consistent with their gender identity subjects the girls to sex discrimination and denies them the benefits to be realized from participation (Tirrell & Turmell v. Edelblut et al., 2025, Counts 1-IV).
The definitions relied upon in the National Sport Ban are embedded in another executive order issued by President Trump, that being the “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” (the Gender Ideology Order). As a consequence, both of these orders are challenged. This case explores the limits of executive authority of the Federal Defendants (President Donald Trump, U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi, and U.S. Acting Secretary of Education Denise Carter).
- In Count V, the plaintiffs allege that the orders effectively compel two of the added defendants, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and U.S. Acting Secretary of Education Denise Carter to discriminate on the basis of sex and to direct the federal agencies they oversee to investigate schools who allow transgender girls to participate on girls’ athletic teams and to withdraw federal funding. As noted in the lawsuit, “The National Sports Ban and the Gender Ideology Order violate the equal protection rights of Plaintiffs and other transgender girls and women under the Fifth Amendment” (Tirrelle & Turmell v. Edelblut et al., 2024, p. 29).
- In Count VI, the Plaintiffs seek an injunction to prevent the Federal Defendants from enforcing or implementing both the National Sport Ban and the Gender Ideology Order, which they argue violate Title IX and require recipients of federal funding to engage in sex discrimination prohibited by Title IX. Plaintiffs further seek a declaration that both orders are ultra vires “as they impermissibly direct agencies to take actions in violation of statutory laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex” (Tirrell & Turmell v. Edelblut et al., 2024, p. 30).
- In Count VII, the Plaintiffs argue that the provisions in the executive orders calling for the withholding or termination of federal funding appropriated by Congress constitute “actions that exceed the President’s Article II powers, unconstitutionally infringe upon Congress’s powers, and attempt to amend federal legislation while bypassing Article I’s Bicameralism and Presentment Clauses” (Tirrell & Turmell v. Edelblut et al., 2024, p. 32).
Since Tirrell and Turmell filed their amended complaint, two further developments have happened. First, the NHIAA Council, under pressure due to the threatened withholding of federal funding from New Hampshire schools, suspended its Policy Statement and School Recommendation Regarding Transgender Participation as of February 14, 2025 pending further review. Second, an organization known as Female Athletes Unlimited has moved to be recognized as an intervenor in this case.
References
Tirrell and Turmell v. Frank Edelblut et al. (2025). United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire. Civil Action No. 1:24-cv-00251.
New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association. (2025). Bylaw Article II-Eligibility. https://www.nhiaa.org/ckfinder/userfiles/files/4HB%2024-25%20%20II%20Eligibility%20-%20Updated%202_14_25(1).pdf
