Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
The bill amends Title 36 U.S. Code definitions of female, male, and sex to refer to biological reproductive systems (eggs or sperm) and adds an eligibility rule prohibiting a person whose sex is male from participating in amateur athletic competitions designated for females, women, or girls.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and civil‑rights harms
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill amends Title 36 to add sex-based definitions and to prohibit persons whose sex is male from participating in competitions designated for females, women, or girls, which is a clear substantive legal change.
The bill amends Title 36 U.S. Code definitions of female, male, and sex to refer to biological reproductive systems (eggs or sperm) and adds an eligibility rule prohibiting a person whose sex is male from participating in amateur athletic competitions designated for females, women, or girls.
Short and administratively clear but highly divisive; minimal fiscal appeal cannot overcome broad political and legal opposition in the Senate.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill amends Title 36 to add sex-based definitions and to prohibit persons whose sex is male from participating in competitions designated for females, women, or girls, which is a clear substantive legal change. The statutory edits are explicit in wording and placement but the bill provides limited implementation mechanisms, no fiscal analysis or resourcing provisions, minimal handling of edge cases, and no accountability or enforcement detail.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and civil‑rights harms
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
The clearest budget scorecard attached to this bill: what it changes for direct spending, revenue, and the deficit.
As reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary on February 17, 2026
Progressives emphasize discrimination and civil‑rights harms
Likely opposed.
They would view this measure as a categorical, sex‑based restriction that targets transgender women and risks discrimination in amateur sports.
They would stress harms to civil rights and the wellbeing of transgender athletes, and foresee legal challenges.
Mixed/concerned.
They would acknowledge the bill's goal of ensuring competitive fairness but worry about its blanket, categorical approach, legal vulnerability, and lack of sport‑specific scientific criteria or due‑process provisions.
Supportive.
They would view the bill as necessary to protect female sports categories and preserve opportunities and safety for biological women and girls.
They would emphasize enforcing sex‑segregated competition based on biological sex.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Short and administratively clear but highly divisive; minimal fiscal appeal cannot overcome broad political and legal opposition in the Senate.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and civil‑rights harms
Short and administratively clear but highly divisive; minimal fiscal appeal cannot overcome broad political and legal opposition in the Sen…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill amends Title 36 to add sex-based definitions and to prohibit persons whose sex is male from participating in competitions designated for females, women, or girls, whi…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.