Rep. Nancy Mace Challenges ACLU Attorney Over Definition of Sex at Supreme Court Hearing
WASHINGTON, D.C. — During a high-profile Supreme Court hearing on the participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports, Rep. Nancy Mace sharply criticized American Civil Liberties Union attorney Joshua Block for his refusal to define the term “sex.” The hearing, which centers on a case involving transgender athlete Becky Pepper-Jackson from West Virginia, has reignited national debates about fairness and the interpretation of Title IX protections.
Joshua Block, senior counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, represented Pepper-Jackson before the nine justices. In his arguments, Block urged the Court not to rely on a fixed definition of sex when interpreting Title IX, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in educational programs and activities receiving federal funding. “I don’t think the purpose of Title IX is to have an accurate definition of sex,” Block stated, emphasizing a broader understanding of gender identity.
Despite his initial stance, Block later conceded, “I think for this case, you can accept for the sake of this case that we’re talking about what they’ve termed to be biological sex.” However, when pressed by reporters after the hearing, Block declined to provide his own definition of sex and avoided further questioning.
Rep. Mace, a Republican from South Carolina, took to social media platform X (formerly Twitter) to express her frustration. She accused Block and the ACLU of lacking credibility on issues of sex discrimination, writing, “They have no credibility lecturing anyone about sex discrimination.” Her comments reflect a broader skepticism among some lawmakers and advocacy groups about expanding interpretations of sex and gender in legal contexts.
The case before the Supreme Court is one of several nationwide challenging how transgender athletes are accommodated in competitive sports, particularly at the scholastic and collegiate levels. The Department of Justice has been involved in related Title IX enforcement actions, underscoring the federal government’s stake in how sex discrimination is defined and policed.
Experts note that the Court’s ruling could have far-reaching implications for educational institutions, athletic organizations, and transgender rights nationwide. The debate over the definition of sex is central to balancing protections for transgender individuals with concerns about fairness in women’s sports.
As the Supreme Court deliberates, the public and policymakers alike are closely watching how legal definitions evolve in response to shifting social understandings. The Supreme Court’s decision is expected to clarify the extent to which Title IX protections apply to transgender athletes and how sex discrimination is interpreted under federal law.
For ongoing coverage of this and related issues, the Department of Health and Human Services provides resources on gender identity and discrimination policies, while the Department of Education continues to monitor Title IX compliance across the nation.
Leave a Reply