Opponents urge Supreme Court to hear case as transgender plaintiff backs out

 

CNA Staff, Sep 4, 2025 / 11:32 am (CNA).

A transgender-identifying plaintiff in a major lawsuit being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court has requested that the court drop the case and reverse lower court rulings favorable to him, with opponents meanwhile urging the Supreme Court to hear the case as scheduled.

Lindsay Hecox originally sued Idaho over its Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, which was passed to block males from gaining access to women’s sporting leagues. A district court and an appeals court both blocked the law.

The high court in July had agreed to consider Hecox’s challenge to Idaho’s ban on men in women’s sports. Two lower courts had ruled in the male athlete’s favor, with Idaho ultimately appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court to settle the dispute.

The Supreme Court at the time said it would also consider a similar case out of West Virginia. Both lawsuits have the potential to significantly affect U.S. case law regarding sports policy and accommodations for those who identify as the opposite sex.

Yet in a Sept. 2 filing, Hecox — through his lawyers at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) — said he was “voluntarily dismiss[ing]” his case, with the ACLU further urging the Supreme Court to vacate the two favorable rulings in the lower courts.

In a declaration in the filing, Hecox said he had made the “extremely difficult decision” to “cease playing women’s sports” in any context covered by the Idaho law. He cited a desire to graduate college quickly, find employment, and move back home to be near his family.

Hecox further cited “negative public scrutiny” and “increased intolerance” as he continued the case. He promised in the declaration that he would not sue Idaho over the law in the future and would not seek to participate in women’s sports in the state.

Hecox’s “unequivocal abandonment of [his] claims … renders this case moot,” the filing states.

Women’s advocates urge court not to drop the case

The decision brought rebuke from women’s advocates, who argued that the filing was a means of avoiding a potentially unfavorable Supreme Court ruling.

John Bursch, a senior attorney with the legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, said in a Sept. 4 press release that the group would “urge the Supreme Court to rule in this case” and ensure that federal law continues to “protect fair competition and equal opportunities for women and girls.”

Bursch noted that the high court has previously criticized efforts to “insulate a decision from review” by the justices. The Supreme Court has noted that such maneuvers “would permit a resumption of the challenged conduct as soon as the case is dismissed.”

Alliance Defending Freedom President Kristen Waggoner similarly criticized the filing on X, describing it on Sept. 3 as “a desperate, bad-faith move that the court should soundly reject.”

“Let’s be clear: The ACLU picked this fight. In red states throughout America, they’ve gone on offense, filing lawsuits against commonsense laws meant to protect women’s sports,” she wrote.

“And now that the Supreme Court has taken up the case, they suddenly want to take their ball and go home?”

Waggoner said advocates would “urge the Supreme Court to thwart the ACLU’s attempt to game the system and to move forward with hearing the case.”

The West Virginia dispute, also being considered by the Supreme Court, arose after a then-11-year-old boy brought a lawsuit against the state over its Save Women’s Sports Act.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the law last year, claiming its enforcement would harm the boy “on the basis of sex.”

Waggoner wrote on Wednesday that “too many women and girls are losing their chance to be champions to kick this can down the road.”

“The issue of men in women’s sports is an ongoing, nationwide controversy. It deserves its day at America’s highest court,” she said.