Weather 
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump spoke out about the U.S. Supreme Court cases over trans athletes in women’s sports, calling out the justice who he believed appeared to be “fighting” to keep “men playing in women’s sports.”
Trump told reporters at a White House press conference Tuesday that he believes the justices who appeared to be on the side of the trans athlete plaintiffs should “lose a lot of credibility.”
“Big Supreme Court case. I mean, I can’t believe it. Some of the justices were fighting hard for men to be able to play in women’s sports. A couple of them, I can’t imagine it. But I think anybody that rules that way should lose a lot of credibility. But we banned men from playing in women’s sports,” Trump said.
“All you have to do is look at the records, look at weightlifting records, look at swimming records, look at track and field. This is not fair. It’s very demeaning to women.”
Trump earlier called out the justices and former President Joe Biden’s administration for its stance in supporting trans athletes in women’s sports.
“The past administration, they had no clue or they were really bad, but they basically had no clue. But they did have, a concept. I mean, they’re still trying to sell the idea of men playing in women’s sports. You saw that in the Supreme Court. I mean, some of those justices were fighting for them, too,” Trump said. “They were fighting for them. But you saw that just the other day in the Supreme Court, men playing in women’s sport doesn’t work.”
The two cases that were heard before the Supreme Court last week focused on the issue of states’ rights to pass laws that ban biological males in women’s and girls sports. Idaho and West Virginia were each sued by trans athletes in those states, who successfully blocked the state laws to protect women’s sports. Now, the Supreme Court will review both cases and cast a potential landmark ruling.
Justices Kentaji Brown-Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor delivered questions and statements during the hearing that might suggest they will rule in favor of the trans athlete plaintiffs.
During the opening arguments of the hearing, Brown-Jackson pressed Idaho Solicitor General Alan Hurst about the state’s law meant to protect girls’ and women’s sports.
“I guess I’m struggling to understand how you can say that this law doesn’t classify on the basis of transgender status,” Jackson said to Hurst. “The law expressly aims to ensure that transgender women can’t play on women’s sports teams. So why is that not a classification on the basis of transgender status?”
Justice Clarence Thomas was seen slouching in his seat with his hand covering his face during this question by Brown-Jackson, as witnessed by Fox News Digital in the courtroom. There were other moments during the hearing where Thomas was seen in the same pose.
INSIDE THE SCOTUS HEARING BOUND TO BE A TURNING POINT IN THE CULTURE WAR OVER TRANS ATHLETES IN WOMEN’S SPORTS
Hurst replied to Jackson, arguing that Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act hinged on a student athlete’s sex, not transgender status.
Jackson continued to press Hurst, asking: “But it treats transgender women different than ciswomen, doesn’t it?”
In another instance, Jackson asked West Virginia Solicitor General Michael Williams similar questions about his state’s Save Women’s Sports Act.
“You have the overarching classification — everybody has to play on the team that is the same as their sex at birth — but then you have a gender-identity definition that is operating within that, meaning a distinction, meaning that for cisgender girls, they can play consistent with their gender identity. For transgender girls, they can’t,” Jackson said.
Meanwhile, Sotomayor cited an estimated 2.8 million people in the U.S. who identify as transgender, and said their rights should be respected even if they represent a small percent of the population.
“What’s percentage enough?” Sotomayor asked. “There are 2.8 million transgender people in the United States. That’s an awfully big figure. … What makes a subclass meaningful to you? Is it one percent? Five percent? Thirty percent? Fifteen percent?
“The numbers don’t talk about the human beings.”
If recent decisions related to trans rights are any indication favorable rule for West Virginia and Idaho is still likely.
In United States v Skrmetti, the Supreme Court, a 6-3 decision on June 18, 2025, upheld Tennessee’s ban on certain gender-affirming medical care for minors. All justices voted down partisan lines, with the six conservative justices voting to uphold the ban and the three liberal justices voting against it.
But in an August 2024 decision on whether former President Joe Biden‘s administration should be granted an emergency request to enforce portions of a new rule that includes protections from discrimination for transgender students under Title IX, the court voted just 5-4 to strike down the request.
Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissented, agreeing with the three liberal justices and the Biden administration that the lower court rulings were “overbroad.”
The request would have permitted biological men in women’s bathrooms, locker rooms and dorms in 10 states where there are state-level and local-level rules in place to prevent it.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
A decision in this case is expected in June at the latest.
Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
