Judge Dismisses HS Student's Lawsuit Alleging Trans Athlete Participation Violated Her Title IX Rights

District Court Judge Wendy Beetlestone dismissed a Pennsylvania track athlete’s lawsuit alleging that competing against a transgender person violated her 14^th Amendment and Title IX rights.

According to The College Fix, Aislin Magalengo filed a lawsuit in January against the Colonial School District after a transgender student-athlete from another school competed against Magalengo as a girl in both track and cross country. Magalengo claimed the inclusion of a transgender athlete negatively impacted other girls due to their “biological advantages." 

However, Judge Beetlestone disagreed. She argued that Magalengo did not show that she was treated differently than a nonprotected class, like male students. Beetlestone said, “Magalengo did not prove she was the target of ‘purposeful’ discrimination.

“The Equal Protection Clause only prohibits intentional discrimination — not discrimination that could result from a policy having a disproportionate impact on a particular group,” said Beetlestone.

Magalengo’s lawyer, Keith Altman said he will be appealing the judge’s decision. “We have a basic belief that you compete against your biology. The judge is ignoring biology. You just simply can’t.”

However, Kristina Moon of the Education Law Center celebrated Beetlestone’s dismissal of the case. She said it, “marked a complete rejection to all the claims brought to a trans athlete competing in high school sports. The suggestion that all trans students have some significant advantage just isn’t the reality of young people’s developmental stages and variations.”

In making her ruling, Beetlestone looked to a 2018 case from the Boyertown Area School District, where transgender students were permitted to use the locker rooms and restrooms that aligned with their gender identity. That case found “the constitutional right to privacy is not absolute and because transgender students face extraordinary social, psychological, and medical risks (…) the School District clearly had a compelling state interest in shielding them from discrimination.”