Alito and Kavanaugh Give Fox News-esque Recitation of Anti-Trans Talking Points
The radicalization of the Supreme Court majority on trans issues has become evident not only in its unusual willingness to take up so many cases on the subject, but also in its eagerness to introduce anti-trans refrains into unrelated cases.
Justice Samuel Alito, unhappy with the dual cases on trans women in sports before him, turned Tuesday to an anti-trans monologue that had nothing to do with the available facts.
“This presents a unique factual situation and we have to decide this matter, but looking at the broader question that many people care about,” he began menacingly, “there are an awful lot of female athletes who are strongly opposed to trans athletes competing with them. What do you say about them? Are they bigots? Are they being deceived into thinking that they are being subjected to unfair competition?”
He appears to be referring to women, including former college swimmer turned MAGA star Riley Gaines, who have made careers among anti-trans women in the sports circuit. It tellingly omits the hundreds of female athletes who support the inclusion of trans competitors, but who are less likely to be as prominently featured in conservative media.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, sensing the Court was taking a breather from the actual legal challenges presented, interjected with a softer-sounding old anti-trans chestnut.
“One of the great American success stories over the last 50 years has been the growth of women’s and women’s sports – it’s an inspiration,” he said. “Some states, as well as the federal government, the NCAA and the Olympic Committee (these are various groups studying this issue), believe that allowing transgender women and girls to participate will undermine or reverse this incredible success and create an injustice.”
The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee and the NCAA have banned trans women from participating due to President Trump’s executive orders. It is not clear which studies he is referring to; The IOC has funded several on trans female athletes, which have found mixed results on issues such as the advantages and disadvantages of cisgender women in areas such as grip and lung function.
Kavanaugh also lamented the plight of the cis girl who loses a game or a spot on the team because of a trans girl’s participation.
“No one likes to lose, no one likes to not be on the team. Cisgender girls aren’t on the team when they compete with other cisgender girls all the time,” responded Joshua Block, an attorney for a trans middle school student from West Virginia. “The question, I think, is whether it’s an unfair advantage to not make the team because a transgender girl participated – and if there’s no biological distinction based on sex, then I think it’s an unfortunate situation, but it’s an unfortunate situation that comes from a zero-sum game.”
Judge Amy Coney Barrett played a supporting role, repeatedly bringing up the scenario of a cisgender boy who fails to get the boys’ team to try out instead of the girls. Chief Justice John Roberts warned that greenlighting such challenges to trans women in sporting bans would create a slippery slope, inviting challenges to anything that differentiates girls from boys.
Yet they are all competing for the bad faith anti-trans coup with Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote several pages in 2025. United States vs. Skrmetti alarmist comments regarding the use of surgery for trans minors.
“The use of surgery to treat gender dysphoria, which Justice Thomas addresses in some detail, is not at issue in this case,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in a brief footnote.
