West Virginia v. B. P. J. · ¶194

The majority’s position is thus fundamentally inconsistent. It credits the West Virginia Legislature’s concern that a class consisting of transgender girls like B. P. J. is large enough to pose an existential threat to girls’ sports, but at the same time holds that this class is too small to be protected by the Equal Protection Clause. In other words, this potentially overbroad generalization is both necessary to furthering substantially the State’s interests in girls’ sports and effectively irrelevant to assessing the classification’s lawfulness. The Court’s equal protection precedents neither require nor support this contorted logic.

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