By Guy Page

Vermonters have responded with strong opinion about the June 30 US Supreme Court decision to allow states to ban transgender-identifying biological boys to play in girls’ sports.

Vermont has no such ban and is highly unlikely, in the current political and legal environment, to enact one. However, the SCOTUS decision could lay a foundation for a nationwide constitutional ban on biological boys playing in girls’ sports, one Vermont lawyer said.

Vermont Family Alliance spokesperson Renee McGuiness said her organization strongly supports the SCOTUS decision.

“VFA is pleased with the SCOTUS’ affirmation that Title IX is based upon biological sex in West Viriginia v. B.P.J.. While the decision upholds state bans on males identifying as females – a.k.a. “transgender women” in women’s sports, it does not directly impact states such as Vermont that have laws that allow males to play in women’s sports,” McGuiness said.

“Biological female plaintiff/plaintiffs would need to take legal action in states with laws that allow ‘transgender women’ to play in women’s sports. The SCOTUS rejected arguments that Title IX requires exemptions for biological males identifying as transgender to play in women’s sports, which indicates a future SCOTUS decision in favor of biological women in states that allow ‘transgender’ women to participate in women’s sports under Title IX. Female athletes harmed by Vermont’s gender identity-inclusive laws need to initiate a lawsuit.

“Would passage of Prop 4/Article 23 ‘Equality of Rights’ amendment in November provide the legal framework for defending Vermont’s LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination laws – and thus “transgender women” in women’s sports – under the undefinable protected classes of gender identity and gender expression? Perhaps this is likely in Vermont Superior Court, but not likely in the Supreme Court of the United States,” McGuiness said.

A Vermont lawyer who supports the SCOTUS decision told VDC pretty much the same thing: the decision will have little impact, now, on Vermont, which has no ban on transgender athletics.  

“I wish I could say that it is a positive development in Vermont, but I can’t say that it will have any effect in Vermont,” the lawyer said. He suspects justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas would have gone further, taking it beyond just state’s rights to ban, to saying the constitution prohibits transgender boys participation in girls’ sports. But that was not the majority decision. He added that “it should be a warning to blue states anyway. It gives momentum in the right direction. But it’s not there yet.”

Rep. Becca Balint was very distressed by the decision. In a Facebook and YouTube post, said that “I’m sad for the trans kids who won’t get to play the sports they love. And as a parent, I’m sad for the parents who will have to watch their government discriminate against their kids.”

Nicole Cota, chapter director of Moms for Liberty, is Windham County resident who also is running for the Vermont House. She said:

“I am very excited to see women’s rights take the forefront in this new fight for legislation. I am a woman, a mother to daughters, a feminist, and an American. I have watched women’s rights get destroyed for far too long. It took courage of many to achieve this decision today. 

I believe every single American has a right to the pursuit of happiness but never at the expense of our unalienable rights listed by our founders. I am proud to say I was on the right side of history for this decision. Girls should never be ignored or overlooked when men or boys try to influence others to roll back their rights. I would happily take the lead on forming legislation that protect trans rights to their own spaces and places in sports and society. It’s only fair. FAIR being the word here. This decision was a great step in the right direction, however when it comes to Vermont we are going backwards and there is so much more work to be done.”