Skip to content

Worth Fighting · Education research

Litigation Database

Reviewed October 10, 2026 · Primary documents, visible evidence gaps

Last checked October 10, 2026. Every record is present in the initial page; search and jurisdiction filters are optional. Unknown/not located identifies an evidence gap, not a finding of noncompliance.

5 records. Open a record for all fields and sources.

Litigation — reviewed sample
RecordJurisdictionEvidence statusPublication
West Virginia v. B.P.J.WVSupreme Court reversal; remand order reviewedDetailed tracker
Little v. HecoxIDSupreme Court reversal; implementation follow-up openDetailed tracker
United States v. California Interscholastic FederationCAResearch record — disposition needs operative orderResearch record
United States v. MinnesotaMNResearch record — complaint verified; later orders unverifiedResearch record
Female Athletes United v. EllisonMNResearch record — preliminary relief denial affirmedResearch record
West Virginia v. B.P.J.WV · Supreme Court reversal; remand order reviewed

Published detail:

West Virginia v. B.P.J. tracker
Docket numbers
Supreme Court 24-43; Fourth Circuit 23-1078 and 23-1130; district 2:21-cv-00316.
Courts
U.S. Supreme Court; Fourth Circuit; Southern District of West Virginia.
Parties
West Virginia and state/school officials; B.P.J. (public case pseudonym). Personal identifying circumstances omitted.
Challenged law or policy
West Virginia’s law defining eligibility for female school sports teams by biological sex.
Claims
Title IX and Equal Protection Clause challenges.
Filing date
Supreme Court petition filed July 11, 2024. Original trial complaint date: Unknown/not located in this review.
Procedural posture
Supreme Court reversed and remanded June 30, 2026. Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court judgment August 13, 2026.
Preliminary relief
Earlier interim protection is not treated as the current operative outcome; see the final appellate remand order.
Permanent relief
The reviewed August order affirms the district court judgment; no new nationwide injunction is created.
Appeal / stay status
Supreme Court merits review completed; judgment issued August 3, 2026.
Supreme Court status
Decided with Little v. Hecox, June 30, 2026.
Relief granted and denied
State restrictions upheld against the reviewed federal challenges; lower appellate judgment reversed.
Geographic and legal scope
The opinion permits the challenged sex-based sports eligibility rules. Footnote 1 does not decide whether schools may allow transgender girls/women to participate on girls’/women’s teams. Facilities and room assignments are not resolved by that sports holding.
Latest reviewed event
August 13, 2026 Fourth Circuit remand order.
Next known deadline
Unknown/not located
Evidence gap / next check
This page does not claim to monitor every later trial-court entry.

Source documents

Last checked: . Standalone page published.

Little v. HecoxID · Supreme Court reversal; implementation follow-up open

Published detail:

Little v. Hecox tracker
Docket numbers
Supreme Court 24-38; Ninth Circuit 20-35813 and 20-35815. Trial docket not independently verified in this review.
Courts
U.S. Supreme Court; Ninth Circuit; District of Idaho.
Parties
Idaho Governor Bradley Little and other state officials; Lindsay Hecox and other plaintiffs. No minor identifying details reproduced.
Challenged law or policy
Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act and sex-based eligibility restrictions.
Claims
Equal Protection Clause challenge to the Idaho law; joint opinion also resolves the West Virginia Title IX question.
Filing date
Supreme Court petition filed July 11, 2024. Original trial complaint date: Unknown/not located in this review.
Procedural posture
Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit judgment and remanded June 30, 2026.
Preliminary relief
The lower-court preliminary-injunction judgment was reviewed and reversed; later remand implementation must be checked in the lower court.
Permanent relief
No independently verified permanent injunction or post-remand trial order in this record.
Appeal / stay status
Supreme Court judgment issued August 3, 2026; later Ninth Circuit implementation not independently located.
Supreme Court status
Decision issued with West Virginia v. B.P.J., June 30, 2026.
Relief granted and denied
Idaho prevailed on the reviewed equal-protection challenge; the Ninth Circuit judgment was reversed.
Geographic and legal scope
Sports eligibility for the challenged Idaho law. Do not transform the joint opinion into a national facilities mandate or proof that all inclusion policies are forbidden.
Latest reviewed event
August 3, 2026 Supreme Court judgment issuance.
Next known deadline
Unknown/not located
Evidence gap / next check
Obtain subsequent Ninth Circuit and district-court orders before describing current implementation details.

Source documents

Last checked: . Standalone page published.

United States v. California Interscholastic FederationCA · Research record — disposition needs operative order
Docket numbers
8:25-cv-01485.
Courts
Central District of California.
Parties
United States; California Interscholastic Federation and California Department of Education.
Challenged law or policy
CDE/CIF gender-identity participation rules for girls’ athletics.
Claims
Federal plaintiff alleges Title IX discrimination.
Filing date
July 9, 2025.
Procedural posture
Public docket mirror entry 54 reports dismissal with prejudice on August 31, 2026. Direct order retrieval was blocked.
Preliminary relief
Unknown/not located
Permanent relief
Requested relief is not treated as granted; full dismissal scope independently unverified.
Appeal / stay status
Unknown/not located; no inference from passage of time.
Supreme Court status
The separate June 30 sports decision is context, not a disposition of this case.
Relief granted and denied
Operative August 31 order not retrieved; standalone case page withheld.
Geographic and legal scope
Unknown/not located
Latest reviewed event
August 31, 2026 mirrored docket event; current direct docket verification incomplete.
Next known deadline
Unknown/not located
Evidence gap / next check
Primary dismissal order, judgment and any appeal required. This record is not labeled pending.

Source documents

Last checked: . Research database only — no standalone page.

United States v. MinnesotaMN · Research record — complaint verified; later orders unverified
Docket numbers
0:26-cv-02078; Document 1.
Courts
District of Minnesota.
Parties
United States; Minnesota Department of Education and Minnesota State High School League, as described in DOJ’s filed complaint.
Challenged law or policy
Sports eligibility and intimate-space access based on gender identity.
Claims
Title IX sex-discrimination allegations.
Filing date
March 30, 2026.
Procedural posture
Filed complaint verified; current docket disposition not independently established.
Preliminary relief
Unknown/not located
Permanent relief
Declaratory, injunctive and damages relief requested; no award independently located.
Appeal / stay status
Unknown/not located
Supreme Court status
No Supreme Court case-specific disposition located.
Relief granted and denied
Complaint establishes requests, not relief granted.
Geographic and legal scope
Named Minnesota defendants; no geographic scope of an unlocated order inferred.
Latest reviewed event
March 30, 2026 filed complaint.
Next known deadline
Unknown/not located
Evidence gap / next check
Current docket and operative orders required for a standalone case page.

Source documents

Last checked: . Research database only — no standalone page.

Female Athletes United v. EllisonMN · Research record — preliminary relief denial affirmed
Docket numbers
Eighth Circuit 25-2899; trial docket not independently verified here.
Courts
Eighth Circuit; District of Minnesota.
Parties
Female Athletes United; Minnesota officials, MSHSL executive director and school boards.
Challenged law or policy
MSHSL gender-identity bylaw and related state policy.
Claims
Title IX claims concerning girls’ athletic opportunities.
Filing date
On or about May 19, 2025, according to the MDE report.
Procedural posture
April 15, 2026 opinion affirmed denial of preliminary injunction.
Preliminary relief
Denied; affirmed on the scope of the Title IX private right of action. The court accepted associational standing, which is a different issue.
Permanent relief
Unknown/not located
Appeal / stay status
Reviewed Eighth Circuit decision; later review not independently located.
Supreme Court status
Subsequent effect of the June 30 joint sports opinion requires docket review.
Relief granted and denied
No preliminary injunction; the opinion did not reach further preliminary-injunction balancing.
Geographic and legal scope
This preliminary-relief ruling is not a blanket judicial endorsement of every Minnesota policy.
Latest reviewed event
April 15, 2026 appellate opinion.
Next known deadline
Unknown/not located
Evidence gap / next check
Held from standalone publication until post-June proceedings and current trial docket are reviewed.

Source documents

Last checked: . Research database only — no standalone page.

How to read status labels

Enacted / proposed
An enacted statute is adopted law; a bill or draft is not. Effective date and practical implementation are separate.
Investigation
An agency is examining allegations. Opening a case does not establish a violation.
Agency finding
The agency has reached a determination under its authority. This is not a court judgment.
Proposed / signed resolution
A proposal is an offer of terms. A signed agreement requires an executed document; acceptance is never inferred from a deadline.
Referral / filed lawsuit
A referral asks another agency to act. A filed lawsuit requires a complaint and court docket.
Complaint / court order
A complaint sets out a party’s allegations and requested relief. An operative court order establishes what the court actually did.
Preliminary / permanent relief
Temporary relief pending litigation differs from final remedies; scope comes from the operative order.
Appeal / stay
An appeal does not by itself pause the challenged order or policy. A stay must be separately verified.
Rule / local practice
State law, association eligibility rules and district policies have different coverage. None alone proves actual local practice.
Research record
Useful evidence exists, but a stated gap prevents a sufficiently supported standalone page.

Download this research

Files contain UTF-8 text. CSV cells beginning with spreadsheet-formula prefixes are escaped. Source URLs, source IDs, tracker URLs, check dates and unknown fields are preserved.

Use under Worth Fighting Dataset Terms.

Have a newer public document? Send a correction with the record name and source.