A bill to prohibit the participation of males in athletic programs or activities at the military service academies that are designated for women or girls.
- Sponsor
- Sen. Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL]
- Committees
- Armed Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 9, 2025
Bottom line
This bill aims to legally codify a prohibition on male participation in female-designated sports at military academies, seeking to preserve competitive opportunities for biological females.
What it actually does
This bill prohibits individuals whose sex is male from participating in athletic programs or activities designated for women or girls at the United States Military Academy, Naval Academy, and Air Force Academy. It clarifies that males may train or practice with these programs if no female is deprived of a roster spot, opportunity, scholarship, or other benefit. The bill defines 'sex' as a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill ensures fair competition and equal opportunities for biological women and girls in sports at military academies, preventing biological males from displacing them due to inherent physical advantages, thereby protecting the integrity of women's sports and ensuring a level playing field.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that such prohibitions are discriminatory against transgender individuals, potentially excluding transgender women from participating in sports consistent with their gender identity, which they view as a violation of their rights and an exclusionary policy that undermines inclusion efforts.
The bill is exceptionally short and clearly written, allowing for a quick and comprehensive understanding of its core provisions within a minute.
Section 1(a)
Prohibition on Male Participation in Women's Sports
This section mandates that the U.S. Military Academy, Naval Academy, and Air Force Academy must not allow individuals whose sex is male to participate in any athletic program or activity specifically designated for women or girls. This directly prevents biological males from competing in female sports at these institutions, aiming to ensure that only biological females compete in these categories.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue this provision is essential to ensure a level playing field for biological women, preserving their ability to achieve athletic success and secure opportunities that might otherwise be taken by biological males with inherent physical advantages.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that this provision is discriminatory, specifically targeting transgender women and denying them the opportunity to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity, which they view as a violation of their rights and an exclusionary policy.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the desire to protect competitive opportunities for biological females against concerns about the inclusion and rights of transgender individuals in sports.
Section 1(b)
Training and Practice Exception
This subsection clarifies that the prohibition does not prevent males from training or practicing with women's or girls' athletic programs. However, this is only permitted as long as no female is deprived of a roster spot, practice or competition opportunity, scholarship, admission, or any other benefit associated with participating in the athletic program. This ensures flexibility while safeguarding female opportunities.
Section 1(c)
Definition of "Sex" and "Athletic Programs"
This section defines "athletic programs and activities" broadly to include all programs conditional on athletic team participation. Crucially, it defines "sex" as "a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth," which is the explicit biological basis for determining who is considered male for the purposes of the prohibition on athletic participation.
Defines "sex" as "a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth."
Section 1(c)(2)
Why it matters:While placing definitions at the end is standard legislative practice, the specificity of this definition is the lynchpin of the bill's intent and could be easily missed by a reader focusing only on the main prohibition.
Case for: Proponents argue that this definition provides a clear, objective, and biologically-based standard for determining eligibility in women's sports, which they believe is essential for maintaining fair competition and protecting opportunities for biological females.
Case against: Critics contend that this definition is overly narrow and exclusionary, failing to recognize gender identity and thereby discriminating against transgender individuals by denying them participation in sports consistent with their affirmed gender.
Estimated impact: This definition is the fundamental basis for the entire bill's application, directly determining who is considered "male" for athletic participation purposes at military academies and thus who is excluded from women's sports.