GOP Rep. Nancy Mace Faults ACLU Attorney for Refusing to Define ‘Sex’ at Supreme Court Hearing in West Virginia v. B.P.J.
Rep. Nancy Mace sharply criticized ACLU attorney Joshua Block after he declined to define “sex” during Supreme Court oral arguments in West Virginia v. B.P.J., a case about a West Virginia law barring transgender girls from girls’ K-12 and college sports.
- Contention over definition: Joshua Block resisted adopting a single legal definition of “sex” during oral argument, drawing sustained questioning from justices.
- Political reaction: Rep. Nancy Mace posted video of Block’s refusal on X, arguing it harmed the ACLU’s credibility on sex-discrimination issues.
- Legal stakes: The Court’s decision could set a national rule on whether states may bar transgender girls from girls’ sports under Title IX.
- Local impact: Walla Walla-area schools and colleges may face policy and budget implications depending on the Court’s ruling.
The case: West Virginia v. B.P.J.
West Virginia v. B.P.J. challenges a 2021 West Virginia law that bars individuals assigned male at birth from competing in girls’ K-12 and college sports. The plaintiff, identified in court filings as B.P.J., is Becky Pepper-Jackson. (Source: Fox News)
What happened at the hearing
At oral argument on Jan. 13, 2026, the justices wrestled with whether Title IX and the Constitution permit a state to restrict female sports to students designated female at birth. Joshua Block, representing B.P.J. for the American Civil Liberties Union, argued the Court need not adopt a single definition of “sex” to resolve the case, saying Title IX covers a wide range of sex stereotyping and gender-based discrimination. (Source: Fox News)
Questions from the justices
Chief Justice John Roberts pressed that the phrase “sex discrimination” must have a legal meaning, asking how the Court could reach a decision without some definition. Other justices raised concerns about practical effects on teams and athletes if sex is not defined in law, debating whether Title IX was intended to protect women’s sports specifically or to broadly outlaw discrimination based on gender expression. (Source: Fox News)
Block’s concession and post-hearing interaction
During argument Block suggested the Court could decide the case without endorsing a single definition of sex. He later offered a narrower formulation for the purposes of the dispute, stating reporters that “for this case, you can accept for the sake of this case that we’re talking about what they’ve termed to be biological sex.” Outside the courthouse he declined to define sex when asked by Fox News Digital and walked away; that exchange was circulated publicly and became a focal point for criticism. (Sources: Fox News, Fox News)
Reactions from lawmakers and lawyers
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) posted video of Block’s refusal on X and wrote that the ACLU “has no credibility lecturing anyone about sex discrimination” if it will not define sex. (Source: Fox News)
John Bursch, counsel for West Virginia and representing female athletes through the Alliance Defending Freedom, called Block’s stance “completely bizarre,” saying it is odd to argue sex-discrimination questions without offering some definition and noting that Title IX was drafted with biological sex distinctions in mind. (Source: Fox News)
Legal stakes in West Virginia v. B.P.J.
At issue is whether a state can bar transgender girls — students who were male at birth but identify as female — from girls’ teams while complying with federal law. Supporters of West Virginia’s law say it protects fair competition and safety; critics say such laws discriminate against transgender students and violate federal civil-rights protections. The Supreme Court’s decision could set a national rule on how Title IX and the Constitution apply to sex and gender in school sports. (Sources: Fox News, Fox News)
Points raised by justices and advocates
- Practical effects: Justice Neil Gorsuch and others asked whether schools could make reasonable classifications when teams have meaningful competition for spots. Block conceded some harms may be “unfortunate” but argued they are not always unfair. (Source: Fox News)
- Statutory meaning: Chief Justice Roberts emphasized that Title IX’s ban on sex discrimination must mean something legally operative; Block argued Title IX remedies should address a range of sex-based harms rather than hinge on a single static definition. (Source: Fox News)
Media coverage and context
The exchanges have been widely reported, particularly in right-leaning outlets that circulated video and commentary criticizing Block and the ACLU. At the time of reporting, available mainstream left-leaning outlets did not prominently publish counterarguments to the specific claim that Block refused to define sex; readers should consult multiple sources as the Court’s full opinion will provide final reasoning. (Sources: Fox News, Meaww News, Ground News)
Implications for Walla Walla, Washington
Economic impact
- School sports and budgets: Local districts may need to revise athletic policies, reassign coaches, or change schedules; budgetary impacts could follow from roster and program changes.
- College athletics: Whitman College and community colleges could see recruitment, scholarship, and roster-management changes that affect attendance and local revenue.
Political consequences
- Local politics: The ruling could become a campaign issue in Walla Walla County and school-board races, mobilizing voters and advocacy groups.
- State-level action: Although Washington law currently protects transgender students, a national ruling supporting state restrictions could prompt local conservative leaders to seek state-level reviews or legal challenges.
Social effects
- Student athletes and families: Team composition, playing time, and perceptions of fairness could change, affecting families on both sides of the debate.
- School climate: Debates and policy changes could strain relationships among students, staff, and the community; administrators may face heightened pressure.
Practical applications for residents
- Attend school board meetings: Residents who want to influence local policy should plan to participate when athletic eligibility and student codes are discussed.
- Coaching and compliance: Athletic directors and coaches should prepare policy memos and training to implement any new legal standards consistently and legally.
- Legal uncertainty: Families and schools should consult legal counsel before making policy changes; local attorneys and advocacy groups will likely offer guidance and may litigate.
Sources and further reading
Primary coverage and further context:
- Fox News: Nancy Mace criticizes ACLU attorney for refusing to define sex; footage shared on X
- Fox News: ACLU attorney suggests sex should not be defined during SCOTUS Title IX case
- Meaww News: Coverage of Mace’s comments and the hearing
- Ground News: Summary of coverage on the hearing
“The Court must interpret what ‘sex discrimination’ means in the context of Title IX and sports — the practical and legal consequences will be far-reaching.”
For local officials, school administrators, coaches, parents and students in Walla Walla, the upcoming decision will require careful review and planning. Stay informed, consult counsel, and participate in local governance to help shape responses to any change in legal standards.
