California girls’ sports advocates vow fight after judge tosses trans athlete case: 'Far from over'
Federal Judge Dismisses DOJ Lawsuit Challenging California’s Transgender Athlete Policy, but Fight Continues
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) challenging California’s policies permitting transgender athletes to compete on girls’ school sports teams, a decision that advocates for girls’ sports say does not resolve the underlying legal or ethical debate. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Cynthia Valenzuela, centered on procedural grounds rather than the substantive question of whether California’s policy aligns with Title IX protections for female athletes.
The DOJ initiated legal action against the California Department of Education (CDE) and the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) in July 2025, alleging that their transgender athlete policies discriminate against female athletes. The lawsuit argued that California’s rules violated Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded education programs. However, Judge Valenzuela dismissed the case, determining that the federal government failed to provide California with explicit prior notice before threatening to withhold $44 billion in education funding over the policy dispute.
A DOJ spokesperson stated the department remains committed to enforcing former President Donald Trump’s policy barring biological males from participating in girls’ sports and is evaluating options for appeal.
The decision has not quelled opposition from conservative groups and parents advocating for girls’ sports. Sophia Lorey, outreach director for the California Family Council and organizer of “Save Girls’ Sports” demonstrations, emphasized that the ruling does not address the core issue of Title IX compliance. “California should not mistake a courtroom technicality for a victory,” she said. “The judge did not rule that allowing males into girls’ sports is fair, lawful, or consistent with Title IX. This case was dismissed on a technicality without deciding the fundamental question at the heart of this fight.”
Lorey added that the dispute intensified following last year’s state track championships, where AB Hernandez, a transgender athlete, won multiple girls’ events. The incident prompted federal scrutiny and subsequent adjustments by the CIF to ensure female athletes’ qualifying positions and podium placements are preserved.
Sonja Shaw, a candidate for California superintendent of public instruction and advocate for female athletes’ rights, criticized the dismissal and called the judge’s decision a “political choice dressed up as law.” She referenced a recent Supreme Court ruling affirming states’ authority to maintain girls’ teams as a “safe space for biological females,” adding, “This is a hill we are willing to die on… I will keep fighting for fairness, safety, privacy, and the future of female athletes.”
Neither the CIF nor the CDE responded to requests for comment on the ruling, citing ongoing litigation. The White House did not immediately respond to inquiries.
The legal battle follows increased national scrutiny of transgender participation in girls’ sports after the Supreme Court issued guidance last month affirming states’ rights to regulate such policies. California’s stance has drawn both support and sharp criticism, with lawmakers and advocacy groups on both sides of the issue vowing to persist.
For now, the DOJ’s next steps remain unclear, but advocates on both sides agree the conversation is far from over. As Lorey stated, “California girls are still paying the price, losing medals, opportunities, roster spots, and privacy while state leaders prioritize gender identity over biological reality. We will not stop until CA girls are protected.”