President Trump took a victory lap Tuesday morning after the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that states can keep girls’ and women’s sports teams reserved for biological females.
At 10:46 AM on June 30, 2026, he posted the win on Truth Social.
The message was short and the tone was unmistakable.
Here is the full plaintext transcript of President Trump’s post:
BIG WIN: The United States Supreme Court just RULED AGAINST MEN PLAYING IN WOMEN’S SPORTS.
Wow! That takes that ridiculous situation off the table!!!
President DONALD J. TRUMP
This was not a sudden discovery for President Trump.
He made men in women’s sports a federal priority in his first weeks back in the White House, and the Court has now confirmed the legal ground underneath that fight.
The ruling came in two consolidated cases, West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, after West Virginia and Idaho defended laws reserving female school sports for biological females against Title IX and equal-protection challenges.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett, giving the states a 6-3 win.
The majority held that Title IX allows schools to provide separate men’s and women’s teams defined by biological sex, pointing to the statute, the Javits Amendment, and longstanding athletics regulations. It also held that West Virginia permissibly kept female sports for biological females.
On equal protection, the Court said West Virginia and Idaho did not violate the Constitution by limiting female teams to biological females in K-12 and college athletics.
The justices found the states’ interests in safety and competitive fairness to be important, especially given the physical differences the opinion discusses between males and females in competitive athletics. They said limiting girls’ and women’s sports to biological females is substantially related to protecting those interests.
The opinion also rejected the argument that schools must run individualized athletic or medical assessments before excluding biological males from female teams. That matters because it keeps the rule administrable for schools, leagues, and state lawmakers.
The Court also made clear that Title VII and Bostock v. Clayton County do not control this sports question. The majority treated the athletics context as different from the employment statute at issue in Bostock.
The decision reversed the Fourth Circuit in the West Virginia case and the Ninth Circuit in the Idaho case.
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch filed concurring opinions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Justice Jackson filed a separate opinion of her own.
🚨 The Supreme Court upheld West Virginia and Idaho laws limiting girls' and women's school sports teams to biological females, holding that Title IX permits sex-separated teams based on biological sex and that the laws do not violate the Equal Protection Clause. pic.twitter.com/XyjSmux2rh
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) June 30, 2026
The Court also noted how fast the country has moved on this issue.
In the past six years, 27 states have passed laws keeping female sports for biological females.
That number tells you where the public has landed, and now the highest court in the country has confirmed those states were on solid legal footing.
President Trump had already drawn the line more than a year before this ruling.
On February 5, 2025, he signed the White House executive order titled “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” a presidential action aimed at schools and athletic associations that allowed men to compete in women’s sports.
The order said its purpose was to protect opportunities for women and girls to compete in safe and fair sports, and it described the practice as demeaning, unfair, and dangerous to female athletes.
It framed the issue through Title IX, noting that schools taking federal funds cannot deny women an equal opportunity to participate in athletics or erase meaningful female access through gender-identity policies.
The order did not treat the issue as symbolic. It tied federal funding, Education Department enforcement, and school policy to the basic question of whether female athletes get privacy, safety, and fair competition.
It laid out the policy plainly: rescind funds from educational programs that strip women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, and oppose male participation in women’s sports as a matter of safety, fairness, dignity, and truth.
That is why Tuesday’s ruling landed as more than a legal headline. It hit directly at the same federal policy fight President Trump put on paper.
That language matched the core of what the Court recognized Tuesday: safety, competitive fairness, and female athletic opportunity matter.
The political fight President Trump put front and center now has a 6-3 legal backbone.
🚨 BREAKING: The Supreme Court has UPHELD state laws BANNING men from women's sports
GREAT news for female athletes across the country!
EVERY state should join West Virginia and Idaho in passing these laws! pic.twitter.com/atJYlU5V7V
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) June 30, 2026
For states and schools, the practical takeaway is direct.
Schools may set eligibility for women’s and girls’ sports based on biological sex, and they can do it without running afoul of Title IX or the Equal Protection Clause.
The 23 states that have not yet acted now have a clear green light if they choose to follow West Virginia and Idaho.
President Trump’s reaction made the through-line obvious.
He campaigned on it, signed an order on it, and watched the Court confirm it.
That is the rare case where the policy fight and the legal ruling end up pointing in exactly the same direction, and women and girls competing on a level field are the ones who win.
Read the full Supreme Court ruling here: West Virginia v. B.P.J. / Little v. Hecox
Join the conversation!
Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!