The Minnesota Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision Wednesday in a years-long legal battle over transgender participation in competitive sports, finding that USA Powerlifting violated state civil rights law when it barred a transgender woman from competing.
JayCee Cooper, who was denied entry into two women’s powerlifting competitions in 2018, brought the lawsuit arguing the exclusion violated Minnesota’s Human Rights Act. According to sources, the high court’s ruling represented a partial victory for Cooper while leaving key questions unresolved.
At the heart of the case was USA Powerlifting’s categorical policy preventing transgender women from participating in women’s divisions. The organization defended its position by arguing the restriction wasn’t based on Cooper’s transgender identity but rather on physical advantages stemming from her sex assigned at birth.
The court decisively rejected this argument on one crucial front. In its written opinion, the justices noted: “Although USA Powerlifting lacked a formal, written transgender participation policy at the time of its initial communication with Cooper, the record establishes—and the parties do not dispute—that USA Powerlifting’s policy at the time of the decision was to categorically exclude transgender women from competing in the women’s division.”
The ruling established that when it comes to public accommodations—businesses and organizations that serve the general public—such blanket exclusions constitute discrimination under Minnesota law. Gender Justice Legal Director Jess Braverman, representing Cooper, characterized the outcome as transformative.
“The court found USA Powerlifting liable for discrimination,” Braverman said. “In other words, when it comes to discrimination public accommodation—you cannot bar transgender women from women’s sports teams, and that is a huge victory. We are so proud.”
However, the Supreme Court’s decision wasn’t a complete win for Cooper. The justices sent a separate business discrimination claim back to district court, instructing lower court judges to examine whether USA Powerlifting can demonstrate a legitimate business justification for its policy.
The court identified genuine factual disputes requiring resolution through trial. Specifically, USA Powerlifting must prove its exclusionary policy serves necessary business purposes, that no reasonable alternatives exist, and that the restriction isn’t rooted in stereotypes about transgender women.
Ansis Viksnins, representing USA Powerlifting, welcomed the opportunity to present evidence about competitive fairness concerns.
“What the Supreme Court did was to hold that there were questions, legitimate questions, for a jury to decide on the business discrimination part of the case, specifically whether USA power lifting had a legitimate business reason for not allowing Ms. Cooper to compete in the women’s division,” he said in an interview. “And so we’re very pleased that the court is giving us that opportunity to present all of the evidence.”
The decision arrives amid heightened national tensions over transgender athletes’ participation in sports. Viksnins expressed concern about potential conflicts between the Minnesota ruling and shifting federal policy directions, particularly under the Trump administration’s approach to Title IX enforcement.
“We’re also very concerned that that part of the Supreme Court’s opinion seems to be in direct conflict with where federal law is going currently,” Viksnins said.
Federal officials have threatened enforcement action against Minnesota over state policies allowing students to compete on teams matching their gender identity, claiming such approaches violate Title IX protections originally designed to ensure equal opportunities for women and girls in education and athletics.
Despite the case returning to lower courts on the business discrimination question, Cooper’s legal team maintained the public accommodations victory stands regardless of future proceedings.
“JayCee Cooper won on public accommodations. That’s not changing no matter what,” Braverman said. ” … Even if we took the business claim to its end and even if USA Powerlifting were successful on that, they would still lose on public accommodations and be liable to her for discrimination.”
Political responses to the ruling broke along predictable lines. Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth, a Republican from Cold Spring, criticized the decision and signaled legislative action ahead.
“This issue is ultimately about safety and fairness, and Minnesotans overwhelmingly agree that their daughters and granddaughters should not be forced to compete against boys. House Republicans are ready to act in the first weeks of next year’s legislative session to make clear that girls’ sports are for girls,” Demuth said.
The case represents one of the first state supreme court rulings to directly address whether anti-discrimination laws protect transgender athletes’ access to sports consistent with their gender identity.
The forthcoming trial on business justification will require USA Powerlifting to present concrete evidence about competitive advantages rather than relying on categorical exclusions.
