Girls Sports

WNBA’s Sophie Cunningham Stands Firm in Face of Criticism

The WNBA’s Sophie Cunningham is under fire for expressing what the vast majority of Americans believe: that biological men should not be permitted to compete in women’s sports.

The latest kerfuffle involving the Indiana Fever guard centered on comments that Cunningham made in an ESPN profile piece with Hallie Grossman.

“I got a lot of negative feedback about me hating trans,” the star player said. “And I’m like, ‘I never once said that.’ I think that I am here to extend love. But I also think with that love is truth, being honest. And I want to protect young girls in a locker room, or young girls in sport who shouldn’t have to go against biological men.”

The morally confused WNBA does have a rule that states “only players who are women are eligible” – but the league has never adopted a definition of what constitutes a woman for purposes of eligibility. Instead, officials have previously muddied the waters in 2022 by issuing a statement supporting the inclusion of sexually confused players in whatever league they want to pursue.

“Banning trans kids from sports ostracizes them from a fundamental part of growing up and a lifeline to feel welcome and a part of their community.”

Of course, none of the policies requiring players to compete according to their biology ostracize anyone – they simply protect women from getting pummeled or unfairly attacked by men.

Earlier this week, in the aftermath of the ESPN profile, reporters pressed Sophie Cunningham on her comments. She was unapologetic in her response.

“I said what I said,” she told the gaggle of press. “I think it’s kind of common sense. I think I’ll always believe in that. I think it’s really important to protect children. I stand on what I said, and I always believe that.”

Asked if she was planning to continue advocating for the issue, she explained, “I’m not a very political person, but I do have beliefs. I have morals, and I’ll always stand on those and stay true to who I am. I think people are gonna take it how they want to take it, but I’ve never even really said anything about that. When it comes just to protecting young girls in sport and women in sport, I feel very strongly about that. I think that’s why you have Title IX.”

Title IX dates to 1972 and prohibits sex-based discrimination in any program that receives federal funding. When it comes to state laws protecting girls sports, the Supreme Court ruled this past June that such legislation is constitutional and doesn’t violate the legendary civil rights law.

As she stated, some of Cunningham’s critics have accused her of “hating” on those who are sexually confused – a charge she strongly rejects.

“I extend love, and I don’t dislike anyone,” she said. “I think there’s room to love everyone … But I’m also there to love biological women, and I think that there are rights that need to be protected. I’m gonna stand true to that. I’ll never fall through in my beliefs in that.”

When a reporter pressed Cunningham about how she deals with the criticism she’s receiving, the star guard’s reaction was instructive.

“I really don’t care,” she said. “Whatever I say, I’m gonna get hate and I’m gonna get love. And if I’m gonna live by the love, I’m gonna die by the hate. And that’s just not who I am. I beat to my own drum. People are always going to have something to say. You could win the championship, you could be the best at whatever it is, and there’s still people who are going to hate on you. And so, that’s just what this world is.”

Earlier this spring, Cunningham shared the exciting news that she had rededicated her life to the Lord. She had previously said her faith grounded her amidst the noise of the WNBA and beyond.

“I got baptized when I was little, but I was feeling a tug on my heart to do it on my terms as an adult!” she wrote in a social media post. “Such a fun, amazing day. Thank you, Jesus.”

As a professional basketball player with a sizable social media following, Sophie Cunningham has a platform few others enjoy. With it comes a lot of scrutiny and criticism. It’s encouraging to see how she’s been handling the scrutiny. In doing so, though, she’s demonstrating for other Christians how to face the critics amid the ongoing cultural upheaval.

As Christians, the criticism will come. The accusations will fly. The Lord doesn’t need us to serve as His public relations agent. A winsomeness may sometimes be in order, but it’s just one form of witness and won’t always win over antagonists of the faith. Jesus never promised universal approval. Public opinions waver – but God’s truth does not.

We care about people, but we shouldn’t care about them running us down because of our convictions. When someone accuses us of expressing an unpopular biblical belief, we don’t back down but instead double down by speaking the truth with love. 

Please join us in praying for Sophie Cunningham and other Christians in the public eye.

Male Athletes Dismiss Lawsuit Challenging New Hampshire Women’s Sports Law

A pair of male athletes have dropped their lawsuit against New Hampshire’s Save Women’s Sports law and two of President Trump’s executive orders (EOs) protecting girls sports, following a blockbuster decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Court, in a 6-3 decision on June 29, upheld West Virginia and Idaho’s laws protecting girls and women from having to compete against “transgender”-identified males in sports.

The Court ruled that “sex” in Title IX, a federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in education programs, “cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex.” The Supreme Court held,

Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex, and West Virginia has permissibly maintained female sports for biological females consistent with Title IX.

The decision has far-reaching implications, sustaining laws or regulations in 27 states safeguarding girls and women’s athletic opportunities. It impacts other lawsuits challenging protections for girls sports – including one in the Granite State.

In 2024, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu signed the Save Women’s Sports bill (HB 1205) into law, requiring any interscholastic, intercollegiate, intramural or club athletic team or sport sponsored by a school be separated based on sex.

The state’s law was, in part, a response to New Hampshire athlete CeCe Telfer, who became the first male to win an NCAA women’s title, placing first in the 400-meter hurdles final in 2019.

“HB 1205 ensures fairness and safety in women’s sports by maintaining integrity and competitive balance in athletic competitions,” Gov. Sununu said at the time.

In August 2024, two other male athletes filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, challenging HB 1205 for violating their “constitutional right to Equal Protection” and Title IX by banning them from competing against girls.

Subsequently, the male athletes expanded their lawsuit and challenged two executive orders signed by President Trump, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” and “Defending Women from Gender Ideology and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

Now, they’ve dismissed the lawsuit entirely, following the Supreme Court’s June 29 ruling.

“Women and girls deserve privacy, safety, and equal opportunities,” said Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) Senior Counsel and Vice President of Litigation Strategy Jonathan Scruggs. “That can’t happen when males are competing in women’s sports, taking spots on women’s athletic teams, and winning women’s championships.”

ADF, representing Female Athletes United, which has members in New Hampshire and other states who have lost to male athletes, intervened in the lawsuit to defend New Hampshire’s law and the EOs.

Scruggs added,

President Trump’s executive orders and New Hampshire’s law recognize common sense and track Title IX, the federal law that ensures equal opportunities for women in athletics. We are grateful this case is coming to an end and that New Hampshire is free to protect its female athletes.

The EOs protect women’s sports and spaces across the country by cutting off funding for educational institutions and athletic associations that “deny female students an equal opportunity to participate in sports and athletic events” by requiring them to compete against males.

The Trump administration has been actively investigating and filing lawsuits against blue states for failing to protect female athletes, launching investigations into Minnesota, California and Illinois for violating Title IX by allowing males to compete against females.

These actions are crucially important. While the Supreme Court concluded Title IX permits states to protect girls sports, it left open the question of whether Title IX requires states to have separate sports teams based on sex.

So, female athletes in 27 states are protected from competing against males. Girls and women in the 23 remaining states without such laws on the books are left vulnerable.

The Trump administration is hoping to use the EOs, which properly interpret Title IX, to ensure all girls and women nationwide are protected from transgender-identified males attempting to compete in their sports.

It’s likely a lawsuit to determine whether Title IX requires all states to protect girls sports will eventually make its way up to our nation’s highest Court.

For now, states like New Hampshire are free to defend girls and women on their own.

All girls and women deserve to be able to dream, hope, train and compete in sports without unwanted intrusion from male athletes.

We’re grateful the Supreme Court has allowed states like New Hampshire to defend female athletes. Now, we hope and pray girls and women in all states will soon be granted the same protections.

The case is Tirrell v. Edelblut.

Related articles and resources:

Blockbuster Supreme Court Ruling: Girls Sports Are for Girls

New Hampshire Enacts ‘Help Not Harm’ and ‘Save Women’s Sports’ Bills

Photo from Shutterstock.

NBC News Believes Saying ‘Biological Male and Female’ Deserves a Trigger Warning

Woke knows no limits on crazy. It seems every week brings new examples of how unstable some liberal minds can be. 

This week did not disappoint.

On June 30th, the morning the United States Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision protecting female high school and college athletes from male intrusion, the NBC News’ TODAY show found it necessary to provide viewers with a trigger warning for why they were using the terms “biological male” and “biological female.”

You can see the spectacle here:

NBC News anchor Craig Melvin announced, 

Just a quick note here, the terms that we’re using here during our reporting – biological male, biological female – the high court put those terms in quotations in their decision and dissent. But just so you know, we’re using those terms from the decision itself, biological male, biological female.

NBC News is wrong here. The majority mentions “biological sex,” “biological women,” and “biological men” 175 times in their decision and concurrences. Not once do they put those words in quotation marks. They state them for the objective facts that they are. Only liberal Justices Sotomayor and Jackson put “biological sex” in quotes as if they are not actual things.

This marks the gaping chasm in how gender ideologues and normal people see reality. Biological sex is a fact that is unoffensive to anyone who is not tainted by gender ideology.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley commented about this silliness from NBC on X, explaining, “This is how the press becomes a parody of itself.”

It certainly is.

Gender ideology is shot through with the ridiculousness of being scared to speak of male and female as objective biological fact. Just last year, Australian Senator Claire Chandler asked Dr. Anna Cody, Australia’s Sex Discrimination Commissioner, about the nature of biology as it concerns what it means to be a man or a woman. 

Dr. Cody responded, “Men, uh, I think we have different language that we are using. I don’t understand the term ‘biological men.’” Cody is a well-educated law school dean who serves the Australian government as the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, and she refuses to use the words “biology” or “biological.”

This is the brain melting poison of gender ideology and NBC News has demonstrated that it is infected with the disease.

No one should ever try to play along with gender ideology, even from a misplaced sense of kindness or silly “pronoun hospitality.” It results in not being able to say what a man or woman is and apologizing for using biologically factual words.

LGBT ideology created and demands this ever-descending level of cultural insanity.

Clarence Thomas: There are Only Two, Unchangeable Sexes

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that states can protect girls and women’s sports with laws separating sports based on biology.

In its 6-3 decision, the Court combined two cases, West Virginia v. B.P.J., and Little v. Hecox, and upheld Idaho and West Virginia’s laws that maintain women’s and girls sports teams only for biological females.

The Court determined 9-0 that Title IX – a federal law ensuring women have equal athletic opportunities – and 6-3 that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment permit states to enact such laws.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the Court’s majority opinion, which was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

Justice Kavanaugh wrote,

The question before the Court is: Under Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, may schools maintain women’s and girls’ sports for biological females? In other words, may schools determine eligibility for women’s and girls’ sports based on biological sex? The answer is yes.

Now, 27 states can continue to protect girls and women from biological males who want to compete against them, threatening their privacy, safety and opportunity to compete.

Females who live in blue states without such laws, however, remain vulnerable. The Trump administration is currently investigating, and filing lawsuits against, multiple states – including California, Maine and Minnesota – for violating Title IX by permitting males to access female athletics.

In the future, the Court may decide whether Title IX requires all states to reserve girls and women’s sports for female athletes.

Justice Thomas wrote a separate two-page concurring opinion, stating, “A man does not have a legal right to compete against women just because he believes that he is a man.” The justice also wrote separately to make two points.

First, Justice Thomas expressed his opinion that “transgender status is not a suspect class requiring heightened equal-protection scrutiny.” The justice wrote,

The class of people who claim transgender status could more accurately be described as people who are experiencing “gender dysphoria,” which is not a “discrete group.”
Because “gender dysphoria” is a mutable mental state that is the object of psychiatric treatment, it does not resemble the immutable characteristics on the basis of which our precedents have applied heightened scrutiny—race, sex, or national origin.

This, according to Justice Thomas’ view, means laws implicating those with “transgender status” can be upheld if legislatures have a rational basis (the lowest bar of constitutional scrutiny) for enacting them.

Last year, in a different case, Justice Barrett wrote a concurring opinion expressing the same view.

Second, Justice Thomas explained what should be a unanimously held view: Men and women are different, and sex is unchangeable.

“Men and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe that they are,” Justice Thomas wrote. “Sex is an immutable ‘biological’ characteristic; it is binary; and ‘man’ and ‘woman,’ ‘boy’ and ‘girl,’ are the terms that correspond to adults and children of each sex.”

Justice Thomas powerfully added,

To use language to obscure reality—to show “indifference regarding the truth”—is to lie to the public and cease to treat our fellow citizens “as equal[s].”

The justice’s reminder of the importance of language, of truthful language, is apt considering the myriad media outlets who, following the Court’s decision, claimed the Court’s decision allows states to prohibit “transgender athletes” from girls sports.

No. The Court permits states to block males from girls sports. There are no “transgender” athletes because there no “transgender people”; there are only males and females, even if some struggle with confusion over their sexual identity. Our language matters because truth matters. Speech shapes people’s perception and influences how they see reality.

Three cheers for Justice Thomas’ reminder to speak the truth, especially in important matters of biology, sexuality and reality.

Focus on the Family exists to help families, and that includes help navigating the issues of homosexuality and transgenderism. Focus offers a free, one-time counseling consultation with a licensed or pastoral counselor. To request a consultation, call 1-855-771-HELP (4357) or fill out our Counseling Consultation Request Form.

Related articles and resources:

Transgender Resources

Chloe Cole: Gender Reassignment Surgery Regret

Blockbuster Supreme Court Ruling: Girls Sports Are for Girls

Top 5 Moments From Supreme Court Arguments Over Girls Sports

Supreme Court to Hear Title IX Girls Sports Cases

U.S. Supreme Court Takes Up Cases on Boys in Girls Sports

Justice Barrett Crucially Explains Why ‘Transgenderism’ is Not a Special Class

Photo from Getty Images.

Blockbuster Supreme Court Ruling: Girls Sports Are for Girls

In a blockbuster decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that states are allowed to protect girls and women’s sports with laws that keep sports separate based on biology.

It’s a tremendous victory for common sense and for girls and women who want to compete on a level playing field – without boys and men who claim to be female.

The opinion combined two cases, State of West Virginia v. BPJ and Little v. Hecox, in which “transgender”-identified male athletes challenged West Virginia and Idaho laws protecting girls and women’s sports. The decision upholds 27 other states with laws or regulations safeguarding girls and women’s athletic opportunities, many of which have been challenged by males who claim to be female.

The Supreme Court held that Title IX allows states to protect girls sports from male athletes:

Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex, and West Virginia has permissibly maintained female sports for biological females consistent with Title IX.

The opinion made clear that “sex” in Title IX, the 1972 federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in education programs, “cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex.” The Court added:

The ordinary meaning of the term “sex” at the time of enactment in the early 1970s was biological sex and not gender identity, particularly in the sports context.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered the opinion for the Court, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the majority opinion.

In a press release, Focus on the Family President Jim Daly praised the decision:

Today’s Supreme Court decision on women’s sports is a win for reality.
It is also a victory for the generations who labored for decades to ensure that our daughters would have the right to compete fairly in athletic events. Radical activists have threatened not only that right but the physical safety of girls and women as well.

Justice Kavanaugh began his opinion by explaining the impact of Title IX for girls and women:

Title IX transformed American sports and American life. Enacted in 1972, that landmark law promoted equal opportunity for female student-athletes and has facilitated the extraordinary growth of women’s and girls’ sports over the past 54 years.

He noted there are “enduring” and “inherent physical differences relevant to athletic performance,” including, “height, weight, strength, speed, endurance, and jumping ability.” Kavanaugh added:

Participation in sports has enabled countless American women and girls to be on a team, to take part in the human drama of athletic competition, to overcome the agony of defeat and know the thrill of victory. And those lessons and experiences in sports have empowered millions of American women who have gone on to thrive in all aspects of American life.

The Court also considered the transgender-identified male athletes’ contention that West Virginia and Idaho’s laws were unconstitutional, violating the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by discriminating against “transgender individuals – specifically, biological males who identify as female.”

The Court rejected this argument, with Kavanaugh writing:

The States’ interests in ensuring safety and competitive fairness amply justify the States in maintaining women’s and girls’ sports for biological females. Under the Equal Protection Clause, therefore, schools may determine eligibility for women’s and girls’ sports based on biological sex.

Idaho was the first state in the nation to protect girls sports from male athletes, passing the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act in 2020.

Just two weeks later, the American Civil Liberties Union, which used to support women’s rights in education, filed a lawsuit challenging the Act on behalf of Lindsay Hecox, who was born male but lives as if he were a woman. Hecox wanted to run with the ladies on Boise State University’s cross-country team.

A federal district court halted enforcement of the Fairness Act, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld that ruling.

In 2021, West Virginia was the fifth state to pass a law protecting female athletics. The Sports Act, HB 3293, clarified that male and female sports teams in public secondary schools and colleges must be based on biological sex.

Again, the law was challenged in court by the ACLU along with Lambda Legal, another radical LGBT activist group.

The complaint was filed on behalf of Becky Pepper-Jackson (BPJ) and his mother, Heather Jackson, who is raising the now 15-year-old boy as if he were a girl. A federal district judge ruled in favor of the state law, but that sensible ruling was overturned by the U.S Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a Christian legal aid nonprofit, intervened in the lawsuit and served as co-counsel with West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey. 

ADF CEO, President, and Chief Counsel Kristen Waggoner applauded the Supreme Court’s decision, saying:

Policies that ignore biological truth hurt people. In West Virginia, the male plaintiff defeated more than 470 girls over 1,400 times, won the women’s state championship in shot put, and sexually harassed our client Adaleia Cross in the girls’ locker room. Adaleia’s story is not unique. After today’s decision, the 23 states still on the sidelines have run out of excuses. Protect women’s sports. Our girls have waited long enough.

In April 2025, the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education launched a Title IX Special Investigations Team to investigate schools and states that allow boys in girls sports. Since then, the DOJ has filed lawsuits against California, Maine and Minnesota for violating Title IX, and the Special Investigations Team has initiated dozens of investigations into school districts for discriminating against girls and women.

While the Court’s decision does not force these states to change their policies, it does provide ammunition for the federal government as it investigates and challenges these states.

It also lends support to girls and women who filed lawsuits against schools and states that allowed boys to compete against them, and it could open the floodgates for even more lawsuits.

The Court has ruled the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause and Title IX permit states to enact laws protecting girls sports. In the future, the Court may consider whether Title IX requires states to do so.

The Daily Citizen has been reporting on the problem of boys in girls sports since we first began publishing. We are thankful for this major decision and will continue to keep our readers informed about this issue – along with others that affect faith, families and freedom.

Related articles and resources:

ACLU Lawsuit Challenges Idaho Law Protecting Girl’s and Women’s Sports

Biologically Male Collegiate Athlete Wins Female Runner of the Week Award

Biologically Male Runner Decides to Compete as a Woman in College Cross Country

Collegiate Women Athletes File Motion to Keep Biological Males Out of Women’s Sports in Idaho

Idaho Governor Signs Laws Protecting Women’s Sports and Keeping Birth Certificates Based on Biology – Activists and Media Call this ‘Discriminatory’

Meet Three Heroes Working to Protect Colorado Children

Middle School Girls Who Protested ‘Trans’ Athlete Are Banned From Future Competition

Top 5 Moments From Supreme Court Arguments Over Girls Sports

U.S. Supreme Court Takes Up Cases on Boys in Girls Sports

West Virginia Passes ‘Save Girls Sports’ Act

Yes, Girls Care When Boys Take Their Trophies

Photo from Getty Images.