A year after Title IX settlement, Penn faculty react to Supreme Court ruling on transgender athletes

Penn faculty members reflected on the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold state bans on transgender athletes in interviews with The Daily Pennsylvanian.

The Court’s June 30 ruling came nearly one year after Penn complied with the federal government’s demands regarding Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education. Penn professors told the DP that while the decision may have limited immediate effects on campus, it could spark broader conversations about equality and transgender rights.

A University spokesperson declined to comment on the matter.

According to history of education professor Jonathan Zimmerman, the “most important” part of the decision was that the Supreme Court made no formal ruling on whether transgender athletes should be allowed to compete alongside those of the gender they identify with. Instead, he said it delegated the authority over those decisions to states.

The justices unanimously agreed that state bans on transgender women and girls from participating in women’s sports do not violate Title IX, though they were divided on the constitutionality of those restrictions.

The National Collegiate Athletics Association previously interpreted Title IX to require schools to allow transgender athletes to compete on teams consistent with their gender identity. Those guidelines changed in February 2025 — a decision that Legal Studies and Business Ethics professor Amanda Shanor said was made “in conformance with the Trump administration.” 

Shanor stated that “nothing really changes” at Penn following the Court’s decision because there is no Pennsylvania law restricting trans athletes’ participation.

Pennsylvania Senate Bill 9 — also known as the Save Women’s Sports Act — is currently pending action in the state House of Representatives. If codified, the bill would require all athletic teams at public schools and universities to be designated as “male, female or coed” and would prevent any athlete assigned male at birth from participating in women’s teams.

As part of the University’s July 2025 resolution with the Education Department, Penn Athletics agreed to “adopt biology-based definitions for the words ‘male’ and ‘female’ pursuant to Title IX and consistent with President Trump’s Executive Orders.”

The Education Department first opened a Title IX investigation into Penn in February 2025 after the University allowed 2022 College graduate and transgender swimmer Lia Thomas to compete on the women’s swimming and diving team during the 2021-22 season.

History professor Kathleen Brown wrote to the DP that the Court’s latest decision will “likely diminish the pool of university applicants who, as young trans athletes, formerly enjoyed opportunities to participate in athletic competition.”

Brown also noted that “even within the category of people assigned female at birth, there is a wide range of physical attributes and capacities that make people more or less athletically gifted.”

Gwendolyn Beetham, associate director of the program in gender, sexuality and women’s studies, similarly wrote that the ruling would have a “devastating effect on young trans people around the country.”

“The fact that both cases centered around high school-aged children shows the lack of concern for young people’s health and wellbeing held by many states, this administration, and the Supreme Court,” Beetham wrote.

Although the ruling “leans into the Title IX definitions of women’s sports as a protected domain,” Brown wrote, “it departs from the spirit of Title IX in that it excludes a cohort of young people from participation in athletic competition.”

Shanor questioned how the federal government “propose[s] to enforce some of these things.”

“That’s a broader issue in this space, and may raise real significant privacy concerns for athletes, including cisgender female athletes who may get questioned about their gender presentation,” she said.

She added that the sex distinctions upheld in the Court’s opinion are “different than employment or other contexts,” in which the Constitution “requires that sex not be considered by the government or used by the government to deal out benefits or treat people differently.”

“The way they did that analytically is to say that, in the context of sports, treating men and women differently is reasonable,” Shanor said. “If that is spun out into other contexts, it would undo all of sex discrimination law.”

Beetham advocated for a University response “as soon as possible" to indicate that “trans students are supported at Penn and will not be discriminated against in any way at this institution.”

“Regardless of whether this statement is made, I want students to know that there are many places on campus where they can go to find community, and staff and faculty who will support them,” Beetham wrote. “I want them to know that they know that they are seen, and that they are a part of Penn.” 

Shanor emphasized the need to “build a vibrant and inclusive community of scholars” at Penn.

“As a university, it’s important that we model what we think our society should look like generally," she said. “That includes what we think about equality, but also what we think about democracy and academic freedom.”

Zimmerman added that those in the University community “need to re-engage” in discussions about how transgender athletes should be allowed to compete, which he said were set aside by “caving to the Trump administration.” He said that he “would like us to invite” voices who “have been pressing against the idea of trans women on women’s teams” to participate in the discourse. 

“Let’s hear from them, and let’s also hear from the ACLU and the other organizations that have been arguing for trans women being on female teams,” Zimmerman told the DP. “Let’s bring them both here. Let’s talk.”

---