Jim Justice, now a U.S. senator and former West Virginia governor, is defending the Save Women’s Sports Act as the Supreme Court prepares to hear a challenge next week. The law, which bars transgender girls from competing in female scholastic athletics, is tied up in a national debate over Title IX and whether Congress or the courts should set the rules. Justice speaks plainly about backing female athletes and argues this is about fairness, not politics. The case began with a local student identified in filings as “B. P. J.” and has moved through courts to a decisive national moment.
As governor in 2021, Justice signed the Save Women’s Sports Act to protect opportunities for girls and women in school sports. That move reflected a straightforward belief: contests separated by biological sex should remain so to preserve fair competition and scholarships. The law sailed through a trial court in 2023 but was reversed on appeal in April 2024, prompting Supreme Court review. Now the nation waits as the high court prepares to weigh in on whether states can limit participation based on biological sex.
Justice made his views clear courtside after coaching a girls’ high school basketball team to a victory, noting the stakes for student athletes. “Why in the world don’t we step up and stand behind all the young girls and all the women who are trying to participate in athletics?” he asked, laying out why he believes states must have authority to protect girls’ sports. He insisted this is not about punishing anyone but about ensuring level playing fields where women can compete fairly. The senator framed the debate as one of common sense and fairness.
He doubled down on the emotional impact he has seen firsthand. “It is unbelievable what they’ve done, and I am so proud of them — And to absolutely just walk away, turn our back and say, ‘Oh, well, it’s OK for us to [let] boys participate against their girls” — I am off-the-chart absolutely standing with our women.” That passage is repeated exactly as he spoke it, and it reflects the raw frustration many conservatives feel about the issue. Justice stressed the toll on girls who train hard only to face biological advantages in competition.
The plaintiff, known in filings as “B. P. J.,” has identified as female since childhood and has pursued medical treatments including puberty blockers. She qualified for state-level track events, which complicates the discussion for some observers who emphasize individual achievement. Still, Justice and his allies argue that a single student’s success does not erase broader competitive disparities. The core legal question is whether federal law like Title IX requires courts to interpret “sex” to include gender identity, or whether Congress should make that change if it wants to.
“This court case is hugely important,” Justice said, emphasizing the institutional implications of the ruling. “At the end of the day, if we can’t stand up for our girls; stand up for our women; I don’t know what in the world is wrong with us.” His remarks position the fight as protecting women’s rights and athletic futures, and they echo a conservative view that legislative, not judicial, changes are appropriate for redefining federal statutes. Justice and West Virginia’s legal team argue Congress must be the forum for any expansion of Title IX protections beyond biological sex.
Justice noted his own coaching experience with girls at Greenbrier East and referenced family ties to the sport, saying, “You should see how hard our girls work all the time to perfect what they’re doing, to absolutely have a dream of going to college and playing ball. My daughter played college basketball. I’ve been there.” Those personal anecdotes are used to underscore the reality that female athletes invest time and dreams that could be jeopardized by policies that erase sex-based categories. For many conservatives, preserving those pathways is urgent and practical, not merely symbolic.
The case will also determine how broadly states can regulate athletic competition in K-12 settings, and the Justice Department has signaled support for the state laws involved. West Virginia’s law was pushed through the legislature by Republican delegates who argued the measure protects Title IX’s original intent. Lawmakers and former state leaders backing the case filed briefs asserting that Congress, not the courts, should decide whether the meaning of “sex” in federal law expands to include gender identity.
For West Virginia, the fight has become a point of pride and a test of principle. Justice praised the state’s response to other challenges and framed the legal battle as a moment for leadership. He said West Virginians are practical, supportive neighbors who expect fairness in competition and clarity in the law. With oral arguments scheduled next week, the outcome will ripple across states weighing similar policies.
