The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to tackle a contentious issue as it prepares to hear arguments on West Virginia’s Save Women’s Sports Act, a law signed in 2021 that bars transgender girls from competing in women’s sports.
On Tuesday, January 20, 2026, the court will examine this legislation, signed by then-Governor Jim Justice, alongside a similar Idaho policy, in a case involving a transgender girl from Bridgeport, identified as B.P.J., who sued to overturn the ban after qualifying for the state track meet with notable finishes in discus and shot-put.
The debate over this law, which was upheld by a trial court in 2023 but overturned on appeal in April 2024, has sparked national attention, with the Supreme Court agreeing to hear the case in July 2024, while 130 Democratic congressional representatives urge a ruling in favor of the transgender athlete, Fox News reported.
Let’s rewind to 2021, when Jim Justice, then West Virginia’s governor and now a U.S. Senator, put pen to paper on the Save Women’s Sports Act, a measure driven by Republican Delegates Evan Worrell, Wayne Clark, and Jonathan Pinson.
This law aimed to keep transgender girls out of women’s sports, but it didn’t take long for a challenge to emerge from B.P.J., a young athlete who has identified as female since third grade and takes puberty-blocking medication.
Her lawsuit, met with harassment and intimidation as claimed by plaintiffs, underscores the deeply personal stakes of this legal battle.
Supporters contend that this case is about more than just sports—it’s about fairness and protecting opportunities for female athletes who’ve worked tirelessly to compete.
Jim Justice, who recently coached the Greenbrier East High School girls’ basketball team to a victory on January 10, 2026, in Berkeley County, has been vocal, filing an amicus brief alongside Governor Patrick Morrisey and Attorney General JB McCuskey to defend the state law.
“Why in the world don't we step up and stand behind all the young girls and all the women who are trying to participate in athletics?” Justice told Fox News Digital, framing the issue as a moral imperative.
Justice’s words cut to the heart of a broader concern: are we sacrificing the dreams of countless girls to accommodate a progressive agenda that redefines fairness?
“This court case is hugely important. At the end of the day, if we can't stand up for our girls, stand up for our women, I don't know what in the world is wrong with us,” he added to Fox News Digital, a固定
His stance, echoed in the amicus brief arguing that only Congress should expand Title IX to include gender identity, challenges the idea that courts can rewrite long-standing protections overnight.
Yet, there’s a flip side—B.P.J.’s story isn’t just a legal footnote; it’s a real kid facing real struggles, and any solution must weigh her dignity against the broader policy implications.
While the Justice Department backs state laws like West Virginia’s during oral arguments, the nation watches, wondering if the Supreme Court will cement traditional boundaries or redraw them in a way that could reshape school sports for generations.
