Shame on Justice Kagan, the one smart and competent member of the Left’s three woman bloc on the Court, for concurring with this drivel. She let the two dummies, Sotomayor (“….the majority, however, inflicts a hardship on those it disfavors without giving them the fair and full opportunity the Constitution requires to litigate their contentions…”) and Jackson carry the water for the indefensible position that a mediocre male athlete has a right to make himself a star by deciding he is a she as Kagan quietly “concurs.” But Kagan was appointed as the Court’s official lesbian, so she had promises to keep, I suppose.
Now back to the Planet Earth. From SCOTUSblog….
“Writing for the court, Kavanaugh made several overarching points. First, he emphasized, men and women have “inherent physical differences” that are “relevant to athletic performance” – for example, “height, weight, strength, speed, endurance, and jumping ability.” As a result of these differences, “forcing female athletes to compete against males can create significant safety risks” in contact sports. Moreover, he added, “in virtually all competitive sports, forcing female athletes to compete against males can undermine competitive fairness.” As a result, he said, “schools therefore typically maintain separate women’s and men’s sports teams.”
“These points provided the underpinning for Kavanaugh’s conclusion that the Idaho and West Virginia laws do not violate Title IX or the Constitution. First, he explained, Title IX bars “discrimination on the basis of sex,” and the regulations that implement the law “expressly permit schools to maintain separate teams for ‘members of each sex.’” When both the law and the regulations refer to “sex,” he wrote, they mean “biological sex,” because that was the “ordinary meaning” of the word when they were enacted in the 1970s. Indeed, he continued, “the Title IX regulations allowed separate sports teams precisely because of the biological differences between the sexes.”
“Kavanaugh pushed back against Pepper-Jackson’s suggestion that interpreting the regulations to bar transgender women and girls from women’s and girls’ sports teams would not be “reasonable” and would therefore violate such a requirement imposed by a 1974 amendment to Title IX. “Separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable” in light of the differences between men and women and the effects of those differences, Kavanaugh wrote. And as evidence of that reasonableness, he noted that “27 States, the NCAA, the” U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee, and the International Olympic Committee “have all drawn the same line.”
“Whether biological males may participate on women’s and girls’ sports teams may be a debated policy question. But the legal question for Title IX purposes is whether West Virginia may limit women’s and girls’ sports teams to biological females. As a matter of text and history, West Virginia may do so,” Kavanaugh concluded.
“Kavanaugh relied on many of the same points in determining that the Idaho and West Virginia laws do not violate the Constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment. Because “the laws limit women’s and girls’ sports teams to biological females,” Kavanaugh explained, they are subject to a constitutional test known as “intermediate scrutiny,” which requires the states to show that a classification based on sex “is ‘substantially related’ to achieving an ‘important’ government objective.”
“Both states’ laws do this, Kavanaugh wrote: the states have “interests in safety and competitive fairness,” which they promote by “limiting women’s and girls’ sports to biological females.”
To which I can only add, “Duh!”
Addendum: Here is how honest the biased left-leaning media is—Vox’s commentary on the decision is to maintain that conservatives on the Supreme Court won’t ever judge progressive litigants fairly. “If you’re a liberal, and you’re thinking of bringing a case to the Supreme Court, don’t,” Ezra Klein’s Frankenstein Monster says. Again, don’t confuse Vox with facts, its mind is made up. A New York Times/Ipsos poll conducted last year found that nearly 80% of Americans, including two-thirds of Democrats, opposed allowing transgender women to compete in women’s sports….because nearly 80% of Americans are not insane.
Ethics Alarms 
Think Powerline’s Saturday morning The Week In Pictures will weigh in on this….?
PWS
Wow…KBJ makes Kamala Harris sound a bit more like Cicero.
I’ve got to believe she just had a clerk lift all that verbiage verbatim from some whacky sociology journal. I doubt she has any idea what it’s supposed to mean. It’s second-hand Authentic Frontier Gibberish.
How did KBJ get a law degree? She is totally incapable of logical reasoning.
She’s a woman and she’s black and at least one of her parents is a teacher so she learned how to behave in class and became a standard issue DEI candidate at every level, including being placed on the Supreme Court.
I fed KBJ’s comment into CHATGpt and it helped clarify what she missed:
The TW is not being punished for gender-non conformity. The TW is being punished for being aggressive which with a biological body as described by Kavenaugh is much more threatening of danger than an real woman. Even men in the workplace have to be careful to avoid displays of aggression – wolves with good manners. So the TW in KBJ’s argument is being punished independently from gender or sex.
I am waiting to see a TW in the WNBA on the same team and friends with Caitlyn Clark. Then the next Clark get’s assaulted on the court, the friendly TW teammate can deliver a gender neutral beat down in response.
The beginning of Sotomayor’s opinion details that this child was abused from the beginning because the gender transition began very early. It is vile, despicable, and Sotomayor should be forced to resign in disgrace for ever supporting something so obviously evil. She is unfit for the bench.
There is an ethics train wreck coming out of this to highlight. It is based on the fact that ideologically driven laws in progressive states have opposing laws that will clash with the now sanctioned laws in other states. Trump did an executive order forcing Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” that forced the United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) to bar biological male athletes from competing in women’s categories.
The USOPC sanctions multiple sports bodies, including USA Swimming. USA Swimming followed along and rewrote it’s rules of competition to comply with the executive order. The result is causing problems in California and Washington. This article details one of the issues:
https://swimswam.com/state-law-usopc-policy-clash-leads-to-difficulty-sanctioning-meets-in-washington/
It’s turned local meets into “observed” meets, where a competition can result in records USA swimming recognizes, but those can’t be used for elevation on the path to the USA swimming Olympic or other country recognized meets. They’ve moved the regional championship to Boise for 2025 and 2026 so they count for the athletes of the Pacific Northwest and they still have a chance at getting on the Olympic team. California hasn’t been this drastic, but it is still causing problems there.
I haven’t heard much about the NCAA yet, but this is coming. We have 12 states governed by leftist lunacy. We have 25 states with transgender athlete related laws. By it’s nature, the NCAA is a nationwide organization, and they’re going to have to navigate this somehow.
I was thinking about this problem. What are blue states and red states gonna do when the inevitable clash comes? When you glorify mental illness and try to form the world around it rather than actually trying to help people suffering with gender dysphoria, you end up with chaotic results like this. There is such a thing as reality telling you something isn’t quite right when a process becomes overly complicated and convoluted.
Honestly, I keep coming back to the same conclusion. If “sex” is a concrete, determinable classification, which has resulting effects on size, musculature, brain function, hormones, instincts, and capabilities; and if “gender” is purely socially constructed, and can be fluid, interchangeable, or even encapsulate new genders made up on the fly, then my only conclusion is that gender as a concept is wholly useless and imaginary, and should be discarded completely. If not completely, at least within the realms of law and education and other such areas where specificity and the ability to actually classify people into discrete groups is important. Everything else is just an attempt to muddy the water.