But for women suing the NCAA, universities and athletic conferences over past transgender-athlete policies, the ruling may prove to be an important turning point.Riley Gaines' lawsuit against the NCAA and Brooke Slusser's lawsuit against San Jose State and the Mountain West Conference each cases seek damages for female athletes who say they lost equal opportunities, privacy, safety or fair competition under policies that allowed transgender-identifying male athletes to compete in women’s sports.SUPREME COURT MAKES RULING ON TRANS ATHLETES IN WOMEN'S SPORTSBlaire Fleming and Lia Thomas.(Getty Images/IMAGN)Bill Bock, an attorney leading both cases for the Independent Council on Women's Sports (ICONS), said the Supreme Court ruling is "huge" because it "absolutely shredded" the reasoning used by lower courts and athletic bodies that had argued Title IX required schools to allow biological males who identify as female to compete in women’s sports.All nine Supreme Court justices agreed that Title IX and its regulations allow federally funded schools and states to separate athletic teams based on biological sex and to exclude transgender females from participating on girls' and women's teams.Bock said that because of that sentiment by all nine justice, the NCAA, Mountain West and the institutions his side is suing now "had no basis for what they did to women.""In all of their arguments, they said, 'We had to, we had to do this because Title IX required us to do this,'" Bock told Fox News Digital.
"The NCAA's first defense is, 'Well, Title IX doesn't apply to us.' The second defense is, 'Well, we had to do it because Title IX required us to.' They're wrong on both counts."Bock said he will account for the ruling when filing future briefs in the lawsuits."We'll be submitting a brief relatively soon in the Mountain West case, that will be required.In the Georgia case, we're waiting for the judge's ruling on the first question, which is whether Title IX applies to the N...