West Virginia v. B. P. J. · ¶150

A month after the ban went into effect, B. P. J. (through her mother) brought this lawsuit, arguing that the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX. B. P. J. pursued litigation not because she could no longer “compete successfully” on male teams due to her hormonal therapy. Cf. ante, at 13. She did so because it would be inconsistent with her gender identity to play sports with boys. In fact, doing the latter would be quite harmful to her: Among other things, as her mother explains, it would “further isolate, stigmatize, and erase her.” 10 App. 4408; see also APA Brief 15–24 (noting the negative consequences that can follow).

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.