NCAA BANS Trans Athletes—Campus Uproar Erupts

Athletes starting a sprint from starting blocks on a blue track

A new lawsuit from a biological male athlete removed from a women’s college track team exposes the ongoing battle over fairness in women’s sports and the effectiveness of long-overdue policy reforms.

Story Snapshot

The NCAA’s 2025 policy now bars transgender women, assigned male at birth, from women’s collegiate teams.
Swarthmore College removed a male-born athlete, Evie Parts, from the women’s team in compliance with this rule.
Parts has sued the NCAA and Swarthmore, claiming discrimination and violations of Title IX and state law.
The outcome could set a precedent for how colleges nationwide enforce common-sense protections in sports.

NCAA Policy Change Restores Integrity in Women’s Sports

The NCAA’s February 2025 decision to restrict participation in women’s sports to athletes assigned female at birth marked a turning point in the fight to safeguard fair competition in collegiate athletics. This policy shift, following an executive order by President Trump, ended years of confusion that allowed biological males to compete alongside female athletes, often resulting in shattered records and lost opportunities for women. Swarthmore College, a Division III institution in Pennsylvania, responded by removing transgender runner Evie Parts from the women’s track team the very day the new policy took effect.

Prior to the rule change, the NCAA permitted transgender women to compete in women’s sports if they met certain requirements. However, mounting frustration from female athletes, parents, and advocates—many of whom saw their daughters lose spots on teams or podiums to biological males—intensified calls for reform. The Trump administration’s executive order and subsequent NCAA action addressed these concerns, aiming to restore a level playing field and uphold the original intent of Title IX, which was designed to protect women’s opportunities, not undermine them.

Lawsuit Claims Discrimination Despite Policy’s Legal Standing

Evie Parts, the removed athlete, filed a federal lawsuit against Swarthmore College, several athletic officials, and the NCAA, alleging violations of Title IX and emotional distress. Parts’ legal team claims that the NCAA’s policy is unlawful and that Swarthmore’s compliance disregarded both federal and state law. Yet, legal experts note that the NCAA, as a private governing body, holds the authority to set eligibility standards for athletic competition, and that Title IX’s original purpose was to prevent discrimination against women—not to erase the distinction between male and female sports categories.

The controversy surrounding Parts’ removal and subsequent reinstatement to the team in April 2025 underscores the contentious and evolving nature of transgender participation in women’s sports. While the lawsuit is pending and the outcome remains uncertain, the case draws national attention to the broader implications for colleges, sports governing bodies, and the future of Title IX enforcement. With other states, such as Pennsylvania, considering legislative bans on transgender athletes in women’s sports, institutional compliance with new policies is likely to face continued legal challenges.

Wider Impact: Protecting Women’s Rights and Common-Sense Policy

At stake in this legal battle is the right of female athletes to compete on a level playing field, free from unfair physical advantages. Supporters of the NCAA’s policy argue it is a necessary step to protect the integrity of women’s sports and to preserve the hard-won gains of Title IX. Opponents, meanwhile, claim discrimination, but their arguments often disregard the fundamental biological differences that justify sex-segregated competition in the first place.

The case also raises questions about the influence of private organizations versus federal and state law in determining athletic eligibility. As lawsuits multiply—both supporting and opposing transgender inclusion—colleges and policymakers face mounting pressure to balance compliance, fairness, and inclusivity. The outcome of Parts’ case could set a critical precedent for how schools nationwide approach these complex issues, with long-term effects on athletic recruitment, team composition, and the protection of women’s rights in sports.

Limited public comment from the NCAA and Swarthmore officials leaves many procedural details unverified, but one point remains clear: the groundswell of support for restoring fairness in women’s sports is only growing. American families, coaches, and athletes across the country continue to demand that institutions respect biological reality and uphold the Constitution’s promise of equal opportunity—not bend to activist pressure or radical agendas that threaten the very concept of women’s athletics.