New Sports Bill Defines 'Sex' Based on Birth Biology, Restricting Transgender Athletes in Female Programs

The "Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025" aims to reshape the landscape of school athletics by amending existing education law, specifically Section 901 of the Education Amendments of 1972. The core change? It legally defines "sex" for athletic participation based solely on an individual's reproductive biology and genetics at birth. This means that any educational institution receiving federal funding cannot allow individuals assigned male at birth to participate in athletic programs designated for females.

Playing by New Rules

This bill directly impacts how schools and colleges nationwide manage sports teams. The law explicitly prohibits males, as defined by the bill, from participating in female-designated sports. Section 2 clarifies that "athletic programs" include any program where team participation is required. So, this isn't just about varsity squads; it covers any school-sponsored athletic activity where being on a team is part of the deal. There's a narrow exception: males can train or practice with female teams, but only if it doesn't take away a roster spot, practice/competition time, scholarship, admission opportunity, or any other benefit from a female athlete. Think of it like this: a male student might be allowed to practice with the girls' soccer team for extra training, but only if it doesn't bump a female player off the team or reduce her playing time in games.

The Fine Print and Future Studies

Beyond the immediate changes, the bill sets up a mandatory study. The Comptroller General has to investigate the "benefits" of single-sex sports for women and girls, and specifically, what might be lost if males are allowed to participate. This study, detailed in Section 2, needs to look at a wide range of potential negative impacts on girls, including psychological, developmental, and social effects. It covers everything from being discouraged from playing sports altogether to losing scholarships or even facing a more hostile environment. The results of this study will go straight to the House Committee on Education and Workforce and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. It's like ordering a deep-dive investigation into the real-world consequences of the bill's core premise.

Real-World Ripple Effects

This bill's definition of "sex" based on reproductive biology at birth raises immediate concerns about the inclusion of transgender and intersex athletes. For example, a transgender female student, assigned male at birth but who identifies and lives as a girl, would be barred from competing on female sports teams. While the bill aims to maintain what it considers a level playing field for cisgender female athletes, it effectively excludes transgender girls from participating in sports aligned with their gender identity. The mandated study could also be a point of contention. Depending on how it's conducted, it could either solidify the bill's justifications or highlight unintended negative consequences for both cisgender and transgender students. The bill is silent on any added expenses or challenges that educational institutions might face as they adjust their athletic programs and policies.