After two high school boys from New Hampshire sued the state for not allowing them to compete in girls’ sports, then expanded the suit to include President Donald Trump’s executive orders banning boys from girls’ sports, two New Hampshire high school girls along with Females Athletes United filed a motion to join the defendants.
The two boys, Parker Tirrell and Iris Turmelle, who identify as transgender, filed the lawsuit titled Tirrell v. Edelblut. Frank Edelblut serves as Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Education.
Last week, a court allowed the plaintiffs to amend their complaint to add the Trump executive orders. On Friday, Female Athletes United, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, filed its motion to intervene. Counsel pointed out that the New Hampshire defendants had an interest in defending the state law to allow sex-designated sports teams for women, which affects only female teams in New Hampshire and says nothing about private spaces like female restrooms. The federal defendants would tailor their Title IX defense to align with the federal regulation implementing Title IX to athletics, but that regulation allows recipient schools to have separate male and female teams. It does not require schools to have sex-separate teams for girls.
The two female high school athletes asked to join Female Athletes United in the federal lawsuit. One who had played against Parker in an indoor soccer league stated:
In this league, I played against Parker on multiple occasions. Because I was scoring a lot, Parker was assigned to defend me, so we often came into physical contact with one another while playing. On several occasions, Parker knocked me down. It felt noticeably different than when I have run into a female when playing. Parker is sturdier, more muscular, and overall just built differently than a female. I was angry and upset that a male was playing against me and knocking me down. It felt inappropriate and unfair that something like this was happening and that no one in charge seemed to recognize what I and the other girls were going through in having to play against a male.
The other girl noted her apprehension when she played against a high school team that included a male goalie. She said, “Although we won, it still felt like a violation of the rights of female athletes to have a sports team designated for girls. Especially, because as the male student is the starting goalie, that student was taking a place on the field that would otherwise have gone to a female athlete. If a male student joined my team, I would strongly consider no longer playing for my school. I think it is unsafe and unfair for a male to take a girl’s spot on the girls’ team.”
One possible problem for the defendants is that the presiding judge, United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty, has already written that the two boys do not have any physical advantage over girls, declaring, “Neither Parker nor Iris have undergone male puberty. Neither of them will undergo male puberty. Both have received hormone therapy to induce female puberty, and both have developed physiological changes associated with female puberty. It is uncontested that there is no medical justification to preclude Parker and Iris from playing girls’ sports.”
Jonathan Scruggs of ADF stated, “Biological difference is the obvious matter, and that’s why we’ll win. … We’ve seen this kind of false narrative on this subject for some time. The fact is someone’s gender identification is not relevant to athletic performance, biology is.” He added, “President Trump’s executive orders and New Hampshire’s law merely recognize common sense and track Title IX, the federal law that ensures equal opportunities for women in athletics. While the rest of the world is returning to biological reality, activists continue to push gender ideology in schools and sports across the country. But female athletes have already suffered enough humiliation of losing to males in women’s sports and being told to stay silent. We are urging the court to consider their voices when deciding this vital case.”
[#item_full_content]
[[{“value”:”
After two high school boys from New Hampshire sued the state for not allowing them to compete in girls’ sports, then expanded the suit to include President Donald Trump’s executive orders banning boys from girls’ sports, two New Hampshire high school girls along with Females Athletes United filed a motion to join the defendants.
The two boys, Parker Tirrell and Iris Turmelle, who identify as transgender, filed the lawsuit titled Tirrell v. Edelblut. Frank Edelblut serves as Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Education.
Last week, a court allowed the plaintiffs to amend their complaint to add the Trump executive orders. On Friday, Female Athletes United, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, filed its motion to intervene. Counsel pointed out that the New Hampshire defendants had an interest in defending the state law to allow sex-designated sports teams for women, which affects only female teams in New Hampshire and says nothing about private spaces like female restrooms. The federal defendants would tailor their Title IX defense to align with the federal regulation implementing Title IX to athletics, but that regulation allows recipient schools to have separate male and female teams. It does not require schools to have sex-separate teams for girls.
The two female high school athletes asked to join Female Athletes United in the federal lawsuit. One who had played against Parker in an indoor soccer league stated:
In this league, I played against Parker on multiple occasions. Because I was scoring a lot, Parker was assigned to defend me, so we often came into physical contact with one another while playing. On several occasions, Parker knocked me down. It felt noticeably different than when I have run into a female when playing. Parker is sturdier, more muscular, and overall just built differently than a female. I was angry and upset that a male was playing against me and knocking me down. It felt inappropriate and unfair that something like this was happening and that no one in charge seemed to recognize what I and the other girls were going through in having to play against a male.
The other girl noted her apprehension when she played against a high school team that included a male goalie. She said, “Although we won, it still felt like a violation of the rights of female athletes to have a sports team designated for girls. Especially, because as the male student is the starting goalie, that student was taking a place on the field that would otherwise have gone to a female athlete. If a male student joined my team, I would strongly consider no longer playing for my school. I think it is unsafe and unfair for a male to take a girl’s spot on the girls’ team.”
One possible problem for the defendants is that the presiding judge, United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty, has already written that the two boys do not have any physical advantage over girls, declaring, “Neither Parker nor Iris have undergone male puberty. Neither of them will undergo male puberty. Both have received hormone therapy to induce female puberty, and both have developed physiological changes associated with female puberty. It is uncontested that there is no medical justification to preclude Parker and Iris from playing girls’ sports.”
Jonathan Scruggs of ADF stated, “Biological difference is the obvious matter, and that’s why we’ll win. … We’ve seen this kind of false narrative on this subject for some time. The fact is someone’s gender identification is not relevant to athletic performance, biology is.” He added, “President Trump’s executive orders and New Hampshire’s law merely recognize common sense and track Title IX, the federal law that ensures equal opportunities for women in athletics. While the rest of the world is returning to biological reality, activists continue to push gender ideology in schools and sports across the country. But female athletes have already suffered enough humiliation of losing to males in women’s sports and being told to stay silent. We are urging the court to consider their voices when deciding this vital case.”
“}]]
