Women athletes allowed to sue Connecticut over letting boys in girls’ high school sports
The case had initially been dismissed by a judge in the state in 2021, with a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit affirming the decision one year ago.
The case had initially been dismissed by a judge in the state in 2021, with a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit affirming the decision one year ago.

The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals revived a lawsuit on Friday brought forth by four female track and field athletes against the state, challenging the rules that allow trans-identified males to compete in women’s sports.
The judges found that the female runners have standing to sue, and have described injuries that could qualify for monetary damages, according to NBC News.
The runners are also seeking to alter some athletic records, alleging that they were deprived of opportunities at the elite-level competitions because the trans-identified males were allowed to compete.
The case had initially been dismissed by a judge in the state in 2021, with a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit affirming the decision one year ago.
Both sides of the case called the ruling a victory, with the ACLU and ACLU Foundation of Connecticut, who are representing transgender runners Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller, citing that the court wrote that the trans-identified runners have an "ongoing interest in litigating against any alteration of their public athletic records."
Roger Brooks, a lawyer for Alliance Defending Freedom, who is representing the four female runners, said the decision was a victory "not only for the women who have been deprived of medals, potential scholarships, and other athletic opportunities, but for all female athletes across the country."
The lawsuit was brought forth in 2020 on behalf of runners Selina Soule, Chelsea Mitchell, Alanna Smith, and Ashley Nicoletti over a Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference policy that allows biological males to compete on women’s teams.
Three of the 15 judges who heard arguments in the case earlier this year dissented to the ruling fully on Friday, with an additional five judges dissenting to portions of the majority ruling.
Libby’s Desk
Commentary and must-reads from Libby’s desk, straight to your inbox.
TPM Newsletter
The Post Millennial’s top stories, delivered to your inbox.


