Whether Arizona's Save Women's Sports Act, which preserves the traditional practice of excluding biological males from girls' and women's sports teams and competitions, violates the Equal Protection Clause

QUESTION PRESENTED The question whether biologically male athletes who identify as female should be allowed to compete in women’s sports is the focus of recent, active, and rapidly evolving public debate. This debate extends to the States, which “are currently engaged in serious, thoughtful examinations,” Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 719 (1997), of the participation of biologically male athletes in girls’ and women’s sports. In just the past few years, twenty-six States have reaffirmed the traditional practice of reserving women’s sports teams and competitions for biological females—including twenty-five by statute. The Fourth and Ninth Circuits, however, have constitutionalized this debate by recognizing a novel constitutional right of biological males who identify as female to participate in girls and women’s sports. Most recently, the Ninth Circuit upheld an equalprotection challenge to Arizona’s statute preserving the traditional separation of sports teams by biological sex. The question presented is: Whether Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act (“SWSA”), which preserves the traditional practice of excluding biological males from girls’ and women’s sports teams and competitions, violates the Equal Protection Clause.