Little v. Hecox

Madison Kenyon and Mary Kate Marshall were both collegiate athletes on Idaho State University’s track and cross-country teams. Since early childhood, both women have pursued the life-defining passion of athletic training and competition. But in 2019, both Madison and Mary Kate had the deflating experience of running against and losing to a male athlete, being bumped down a placement level because of that athlete’s participation. To keep other female athletes from facing unfair competitions like these, the state of Idaho enacted the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act in March 2020. Weeks later, the ACLU challenged this commonsense law, but Madison and Mary Kate stepped in to defend the law to ensure that women have a chance to compete and win in their own sports.

After an unfavorable ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, ADF is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold Idaho’s law and protect fairness in women’s sports.

Case Timeline

• March 2020: Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act into law. Idaho was the first state to pass such a law protecting equal opportunities for women and girls.
• May 2020: ADF asked to intervene in the ACLU’s lawsuit on behalf of Madison and Mary Kate.
• August 2020: A federal court allowed Madison and Mary Kate to intervene in the lawsuit and speak up on behalf of Idaho’s law. Unfortunately, the court also halted enforcement of the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act while the lawsuit continues, which means male athletes who identify as women will still be able to compete against women and girls.
• September 2020: ADF appealed this ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
• May 2021: ADF attorneys and attorneys representing the state of Idaho presented arguments in this case to a panel of judges from the 9th Circuit.
• June 2021: The 9th Circuit remanded the case back to the district court to resolve a procedural issue.
• November 2022: ADF attorneys together with attorneys for the state of Idaho presented arguments before a panel of judges from the 9th Circuit for the second time.
• August 2023: After an unfavorable ruling from the panel, ADF attorneys asked the full 9th Circuit to review the case.
• June 2024: The 9th Circuit denied ADF’s request for the full panel to review the case.
• July 2024: The state of Idaho, alongside ADF attorneys, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case.
• July 2025: The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.