On September 2, 2025, Lindsay Hecox, a transgender woman and senior at Boise State University, formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to dismiss her closely watched lawsuit challenging Idaho’s ban on transgender athletes in women’s sports. The move marks a dramatic turn in a legal battle that has spanned more than five years, drawing national attention and fueling fierce debate about transgender rights, women’s sports, and the reach of federal anti-discrimination law.
Hecox’s decision to step back from the case, as reported by CNN and Nexstar Media, comes amid mounting personal and academic pressures, as well as what she described as “intense negative public scrutiny” tied to her role as the face of the lawsuit. In her declaration to the court, Hecox wrote, “From the beginning of this case, I have come under negative public scrutiny from certain quarters. I also have observed increased intolerance generally for people who are transgender and specifically for transgender women who participate in sports.” She added, “I am afraid that if I continue my lawsuit, I will personally be subjected to harassment that will negatively impact my mental health, my safety, and my ability to graduate as soon as possible.”
Hecox’s attorneys, representing the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), echoed these concerns in their filing, stating that ongoing litigation would “distract her from her schoolwork and prevent her from meeting her academic and personal goals.” Hecox, now 24, is not expected to graduate before May 2026 and has committed not to participate in any women’s sports covered by Idaho’s law while she remains in the state. She also affirmed she would not bring further legal challenges to the ban.
The Idaho law at the heart of the dispute, H.B. 500, was signed in 2020 by Republican Governor Brad Little. It was the first state law in the nation to restrict transgender women and girls from participating in school sports consistent with their gender identity. Hecox, then a freshman, sued almost immediately, alleging the law violated the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. A federal district court quickly blocked the law’s enforcement against her, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision in 2024.
Despite Hecox’s withdrawal, the Supreme Court’s involvement in the broader issue is far from over. In July 2025, the justices agreed to hear appeals from Idaho and West Virginia, both defending state bans on transgender athletes. Even if Hecox’s request to dismiss is granted, the court will still hear a similar case involving Becky Pepper-Jackson, a transgender student from West Virginia, during the 2025-2026 term. The outcome is expected to determine whether Title IX—the federal law barring sex discrimination in schools—prohibits states from banning transgender students from teams matching their gender identity. A decision is anticipated by June 2026.
The ACLU, which has represented Hecox throughout the legal battle, argued in its Supreme Court filing that her “unequivocal abandonment” of her claims renders the case moot. “Because the issues presented are no longer live and because no controversy between the parties exists or has a chance of recurring, this case should be dismissed as moot,” the ACLU wrote. The group also cited the toll of “negative public scrutiny from certain quarters because of this litigation” on Hecox’s well-being and academic progress.
On the other side, the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative legal group defending Idaho’s law, sharply criticized the move. Senior counsel John Bursch accused the ACLU of attempting to “insulate a decision from review by this Court” after litigating the case for years and insisting it was “not moot.” Pointing to a Supreme Court precedent, Bursch stated, “The voluntary cessation of challenged conduct does not ordinarily render a case moot because a dismissal for mootness would permit a resumption of the challenged conduct as soon as the case is dismissed.” He added, “We will urge the Supreme Court to rule in this case and ensure that Title IX stands as it was originally intended: to protect fair competition and equal opportunities for women and girls.”
This sentiment was echoed by Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan, who labeled the ACLU’s motion a “procedural hail mary” and warned against potential “gamesmanship” in legal challenges if such dismissals are allowed. Wessan argued that if the court deems the case moot, there should be restrictions on attorneys bringing similar challenges in the future to prevent manipulation of appellate review.
The legal and political stakes are high. Idaho’s law was the first of its kind, but similar sports bans have since been enacted in 27 states, according to reporting by CNN and Nexstar Media. The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling could either uphold these restrictions or set a national precedent affirming the rights of transgender students to participate in sports according to their gender identity. The issue has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over transgender rights, with Republican-led states and the Trump administration seeking to roll back protections put in place over the past decade.
Transgender advocates, meanwhile, are still reeling from the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision earlier in 2025 in US v. Skrmetti, which upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for trans youth. Many see the sports cases as the next major battleground, with the court’s conservative majority viewed as likely to be skeptical of challenges to the bans.
For Hecox, the personal cost of being at the center of this legal and cultural storm proved too great. Her attorneys emphasized that while playing women’s sports is important to her, “her top priority is graduating from college and living a healthy and safe life.” Hecox’s withdrawal underscores the challenges faced by individual plaintiffs and advocacy groups in sustaining long-term legal battles under intense public scrutiny.
As the Supreme Court weighs whether to dismiss the Hecox case as moot, all eyes now turn to the West Virginia case, which raises nearly identical legal questions. The court’s decision, expected by summer 2026, will likely shape the future of transgender participation in school sports and the scope of Title IX for years to come.
Regardless of the outcome, the debate over who gets to compete—and under what rules—remains as contentious and consequential as ever. With Hecox stepping away, the legal spotlight shifts, but the underlying questions about fairness, inclusion, and the meaning of equality in American schools continue to demand answers.
