Hecox v. Little Our challenge to Idaho’s anti-trans sports law

Current Status

On July 3, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear our case.

Contact

Legal Voice Communications
media@legalvoice.org

Background

In 2020, Idaho became the first state to ban trans women and girls from participating in sports at school. The ban, HB 500, also targets nonbinary and intersex students on female teams.

Though many states have gone on to enact similar laws, Idaho’s is especially cruel because it allows anyone to “dispute” the sex of students participating in female athletics. These athletes must then undergo invasive “sex verification” screenings.

Our Argument

HB 500 is illegal because it undermines the right to equal protection. Idaho’s law was developed to discriminate against transgender women and girls. But it also discriminates against all athletes on female sports teams, including those who are cisgender or intersex. Under the law, only these athletes may be subjected to invasive, traumatic medical examinations. Even girls in elementary school could be forced to undergo unnecessary gynecological examinations merely because someone “disputes” their sex. Meanwhile, athletes on male teams face no such treatment.

Plaintiffs

Lindsay Hecox

Lindsay is a woman who participates in club sports at Boise State University. She is transgender.

Jane Doe

This former plaintiff is a cisgender woman who feared that her sex would be “disputed” under Idaho’s law. Jane’s claims eventually became moot because she attended college out of state.

Defendants

Bradley Little, governor of Idaho
Sherri Ybarra, superintendent of public instruction and member of the Idaho State Board of Education
Members of the State Board of Education
Boise State University
Marlene Tromp, President of Boise State University
Independent School District of Boise City #1
Coby Dennis, superintendent of the Independent School District of Boise City #1
Individual Members of the Board of Trustees of the Independent School District Of Boise City #1
Members of the Idaho Code Commission

Co-Counsel

The American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Idaho

The ACLU and ACLU of Idaho strive to advance civil liberties and civil rights through activities that include litigation, education, and lobbying.

Cooley LLP

Cooley represents hundreds of pro bono clients annually. It empowers individuals to seek justice and opportunity, provides nonprofit organizations the tools they need to effect change, and supports the economic development of underserved communities.

“…there is no legitimate reason to seek to bar all trans girls and women from girls’ and women’s sport, or to require students whose sex is challenged to prove their eligibility in such intrusive detail.”

— Professor Doriane Lambelet Coleman, whose work was misleadingly cited in the HB 500 legislative findings

“This draft legislation requires some, but not all, student athletes to ‘establish’ their sex… This disparate treatment, which has a likely disparate impact, raises equal protection concerns that would require an exceedingly persuasive justification to overcome.”

—Office of the Idaho Attorney General, in its analysis of HB 500

“We urge that you exercise your veto on House Bill 500 to keep a legally infirm statute off of the books and to save the State from having to pay out substantial legal fees to those who take it to court.”

— Five former Idaho attorneys general, in a letter to Governor Little

“In Idaho and around the country, transgender people of all ages have been participating in sports consistent with their gender identity for years. Inclusive teams support all athletes and encourage participation — this should be the standard for all school sports.”

— Gabriel Arkles, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project

“I just want to run with other girls on the team. I run for myself, but part of what I enjoy about the sport is building the relationships with a team. I’m a girl, and the right team for me is the girls’ team.”

—Lindsay Hecox, plaintiff

“Idaho’s ‘Fairness in Women’s Sports Act’ is anything but fair. It allows any aggrieved individual to force any Idaho student-athlete participating in female sports to undergo an intrusive and personal medical examination to ‘prove’ their sex. No male athletes can be forced to undergo the same. The law has no rational relationship to athletic opportunities or to gender equality.”

—Wendy Heipt, Legal Voice senior reproductive justice counsel