Advocacy groups file federal cases targeting student athletics and compelled speech on gender identity
In two newly filed federal lawsuits, advocacy groups in Minnesota and Colorado are challenging state policies that they argue violate constitutional and statutory protections related to gender identity. Both cases, filed on May 19, 2025, allege harms to individuals who oppose the inclusion of gender identity-based rules in education and public accommodations.
The Minnesota case, Female Athletes United v. Ellison et al. (Case No. 0:25-cv-02151), centers on Title IX claims, while the Colorado case, Defending Education et al. v. Sullivan et al. (Case No. 1:25-cv-01572), invokes the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
In Minnesota, Female Athletes United (FAU), a nonprofit advocating for exclusive female competition in school sports, is suing multiple state and school district officials. The group argues that policies allowing transgender girls—biological males who identify as female—to compete in girls’ sports violate Title IX’s prohibition against sex discrimination. The complaint focuses on softball games involving a male athlete, in which FAU members allege they were disadvantaged or injured due to physiological differences. According to the lawsuit, these policies result in lost athletic opportunities and heightened safety risks for female students.
In Colorado, a coalition of advocacy groups and a physician filed suit against state officials to block enforcement of House Bill 25-1312. This law, signed by Governor Jared Polis on May 16, 2025, updates Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act to prohibit “deadnaming” or “misgendering” in public accommodations. The plaintiffs claim the law compels speech in violation of the First Amendment, particularly for those who hold religious or philosophical beliefs that gender is fixed at birth. They also argue that the statute is vague and invites viewpoint discrimination by threatening individuals who publish or speak in ways that may offend based on gender expression.
Both cases cite recent federal directives and court rulings in support of their positions. The Minnesota complaint points to a 2025 executive order from President Trump clarifying that Title IX protections are tied to biological sex. In the Colorado complaint, plaintiffs reference the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis and Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission to argue that anti-discrimination laws cannot override constitutionally protected speech.
The Minnesota plaintiffs seek injunctive relief preventing the enforcement of policies that permit male athletes in girls’ sports. The Colorado plaintiffs seek a declaration that H.B. 25-1312 is unconstitutional and an injunction against its enforcement.
No hearing dates have yet been set in either case. In the Minnesota case, the state tournament schedule referenced in the complaint suggests a request for preliminary relief could follow. In the Colorado matter, the plaintiffs’ organizations plan to continue public events that could trigger enforcement of the challenged law, indicating further motion practice is expected.
It is always worthwhile to ask who is funding a group. The Minnesota group is being funded by ADF (Alliance for the Defense of Freedom) a group that has come into national prominence for their promotion of the agendas of the Christian Right and was founded by some of those leaders. They have had significant success in getting the Supreme Court to overturn a number of State laws that they opposed and some National ones as well including Roe vs Wade. Some of the same rich billionaires behind ADF are also backing the groups in Colorado. The Kochs have long fought against public education, so no surprise they sit in the background. Regardless of your personal ideology, it is always worthwhile to know who is behind something. If you agree with the agenda, who are you getting in bed with, so to speak. I personally find that there are always a lot of hidden agendas in these kinds of suits.