California Track Meet Ignites Dispute Over Trans Athletes in Women’s Sports

By: Lauren Hickey

A California girls’ track meet became a topic of heated discussion lately when the California Interscholastic Federation's (CIF) policy was debated by three Christian high schools on the transgender issue of athletes being biologically male can participate in girls’ sports, causing a massive uproar throughout the US over questions of justice, completeness, and the direction of women's sports.

On May 10, 2025, a girls' track meet in California turned from a mere sports event into a significant political gathering that brought to the surface the struggle to achieve conformity in an environment of transgender athletes competing in women's sports. Three Christian high schools in California have written a letter to the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) to challenge its current policy, which has allowed boys to play in girls’ events for a long time. Their reasons for doing this are fairness and safety issues. As per the information reported by Fox News regarding the rally, it has become a catalyst for the ongoing nationwide discussion on attaining inclusion without undermining the fairness of women's sports.

The incident occurred almost immediately after a school board of the Redlands Unified, located in San Bernardino, in late April had passed the policy to prevent transgender athletes from competing in girls' sports, thus showing the general mood in California about this issue. It has been recently revealed that 65% of individuals who may participate in the coming election in California have expressed their willingness to permit transgender athletes to compete based on their sex at birth and not on how they currently represent themselves, according to a bipartisan survey by the Public Policy Institute of California.

The issue around which the controversy is swirling is that of fairness. Some people argue that men who have undergone hormone therapy still retain certain physical advantages: muscle mass, bone density, and testosterone-based athletic performance, which can lead to unfair competition. Advocates for inclusivity, on the other hand, support the opinion that transgender athletes should participate in sports events based on their gender identity, underlining the marginal number of transgender athletes and the necessity for society's positive acknowledgement of their gender. The CIF is in the middle of an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education over potential Title IX violations, and with that comes an increasing demand on the organization to change its policies.

In order to take a closer look at this situation, I spoke to two individuals who are friends of friends of mine: Sarah Thompson, a high school track coach, and Jamie Rivera, a transgender athlete and college sophomore. Here are the questions along with their answers:

How do you feel about transgender athletes who compete in women’s sports?

Sarah Thompson (Coach): "I have been coaching girls' track for 15 years now, and I'm all about inclusion, but fairness is the basic need. It is often the case that biological males are physically stronger - they have better sprint times and can jump further - and that can result in a complete domination of the girls' events. I saw it in the last match; there was a significant performance gap, and it saddened my athletes. We urgently need a remedy that allows everyone to be respected while at the same time does not dismantle the integrity of women's sports."

Jamie Rivera (Athlete): “My motivation to compete as who I am as a transgender woman only. The process of hormone therapy has been with me for two years, it is beneficial in solving many of the physical problems. Athletes are the ones who talk about identity and community, and not necessarily biology. Letting trans athletes in is more or less equal to extending the hand of acceptance to them, while, on the contrary, not allowing them is the same as screaming out loud and clear how ignorant we are. I understand the equality claim, but the point is that the focus on biology is that it never, rarely takes into account how few of us are actually competing at elite levels.”

How do you think policies should take into account fairness and, at the same time, be inclusive?

Sarah Thompson: "I know it's difficult, but an open category similar to what was recently introduced by British Triathlon could be a solution. It allows trans athletes to take part in the competition without taking away the women's category for biological females. According to the research, even if a trans woman undergoes testosterone suppression, she can still benefit from male puberty, so separate categories would be the most equitable way to involve all people."

Jamie Rivera: “An open category sounds inclusive, but it can feel like segregation. I’d prefer policies based on hormone levels, like the old NCAA rules, where you had to maintain low testosterone for a year. That’s evidence-based and lets trans women compete with other women. Fairness shouldn’t mean exclusion—it should mean finding a way for everyone to participate.”

What kind of consequences do you think this debate will bring to the future of sports?

Sarah Thompson: “If we don’t address this thoughtfully, women’s sports could lose their competitive integrity. Girls are already dropping out when they feel they can’t win. I worry we’ll see more bans or legal battles, which could polarize things further. We need clear, science-based policies that everyone can absolutely trust."

Jamie Rivera: “The debate’s getting louder, and I’m afraid it’s pushing trans athletes out entirely. Look at World Athletics or the NCAA’s new bans—trans women are being erased from sports. I hope we move toward policies that prioritize inclusion while addressing concerns, but right now, it feels like fear is winning.”

The drama surrounding the California track meet situation is a precise example of a more general worldwide change. For instance, World Athletics has already disqualified the athletes who have undergone male puberty from women’s categories since 2023 and has the intention to carry out cheek swab tests for the verification of biological sex before the 2025 World Championships. Furthermore, the Football Association of England prohibited transgender women from the female game of soccer as of June 1, 2025, a verdict of the UK Supreme Court that “woman” was defined as a female by biology had come out. These policies show that, in general, there is an increasing trend of putting more emphasis on the aspect of an athlete's biological sex over their gender identity in the context of women's sports, which is largely the result of legal and public pressure.

The science, of course, is still not settled. Dr. Joshua Safer of the Mount Sinai Center for Transgender Medicine commented that there is that the number of transgender athletes is limited and that there are no data on the range of sports they participate in, which makes the crafting of universal policies difficult. Although there are studies that show such advantages as muscle mass may be eliminated after the hormone therapy, there are still reports that differences in strength or speed may continue. Dr. Bradley Anawalt indicated to CNN that no degree of scientific inquiry will be able to meet the needs of all the sides, as the question of fairness remains more social than a scientific one.

Public opinion is in favor of greatly limiting the participation of transgender individuals. A New York Times/Ipsos survey conducted in January 2025 showed that 79% of citizens, 67% of whom were Democrats, believe that boys should not compete in women’s sports so as not to leave any room for ambiguity. An NBC News poll indicated this, showing that 75 percent of adults disagreed with transgender females participating in women's sports; nonetheless, Gen Z had a slight inclination to allow it. California had been with Governor Gavin Newsom, who had long been standing for LGBTQ, who in March 2025, contradicted his party by calling transgender participation in women’s sports “deeply unfair” on his podcast, thus causing him to be criticized by trans advocates.

As a person who is investigating this topic, I think that this dispute about transgender athletes in women's sports is the meeting of two opposite but true sides: fairness in competition and the right to be included. Even with hormone therapy, the biological differences between the two sexes, from the time of puberty, particularly, are so big that they result in advantages that hormone therapy alone may not fully take away. An example of such cases is AB Hernandez's victory in California's triple jump, so dominant and a clear indication of the advantage, even with hormone therapy. This gives off a feeling of unfairness that results in female athletes not feeling welcome, and the progress of the Title IX regulation goes to waste. This regulation was meant to ensure that there were equal sports opportunities for women.

Yet, the bans extending across 18 different U.S. states, as well as those enacted by World Athletics, are seen as excessive and push aside harmless transgender athletes who are potential non-competitors. Less than 10 trans athletes in NCAA sports out of 500,000 only represent a small fraction of the whole, thus making the issue appear to be misapplied for political reasons. I suggest that we adopt a hybrid model: retain women's categories for biological females, make available categories for Trans and nonbinary athletes, and also consider hormone-based qualification for Trans women in female events if the data proves that such a procedure is fair. It balances the inclusive approach with competitive fairness, however, it needs more study to be tuned.

The course of this discussion is a clear indication that limitations are going to grow. With figures such as Donald Trump, who makes use of his power to prohibit the participation of transgender athletes through the issue of executive orders, and the general public giving their support to categories based on biological sex, it is very possible that more sports organizations may come up with exclusionary policies. Court cases, like the one filed by female athletes in the NCAA or the lawsuit of the U.S. government against Maine, can be assumed to get more intense over a period of time, and they will likely end up in the Supreme Court. On the contrary, a rise in discrimination against trans athletes may not be prevented unless the non-gendered groups, such as open categories, are supported. Nevertheless, what needs to be done is to find a solution that allows for the coexistence and the co-prosperity of both the women’s sports sector and the transgender athletes, where the emphasis is put on finding a middle ground instead of dividing people into two vastly different groups. The trick is to find a way that makes sports for women feel like real women are still participating while also allowing transgender athletes to retain their dignity and respect, which requires a solution that achieves a balance of neither right nor left extreme.