Washington must defend the girls’ sports law voters approved

Washington voters put girls' teams back in girls' hands, and the attorney general must now defend that choice in court. The ACLU of Washington, Legal Voice and Pacifica Law Group represent the plaintiffs in a lawsuit to stop Initiative 638 from taking effect Dec. 3. The Washington State Standard reports that the suit was filed Monday in King County Superior Court¹.

The plaintiffs are TransFamilies, a Washington nonprofit, the Washington Education Association, and parents of public-school students who play girls' sports². The Washington Education Association is a named plaintiff in a suit asking a King County judge to block I-638 before it takes effect Dec. 3. On Nov. 10, Ari Hoffman, posting as @thehoffather, wrote: “The law will keep boys out of girls' sports.”³

“When a new law is passed by the people or the Legislature, our role is to ensure it is defended regardless of our personal views about the policy,”

Voters approved I-638 by 56%

That decision was fresh: the lawsuit came one week after the election. As of Tuesday morning, the Washington State Standard reports, Initiative 638 had 56% of the vote and was sure to pass¹. KOMO reports that voters approved it by 11 points².

Conservatives did not carry it alone. The Washington State Standard reports that left-leaning voters helped pass the measure, even as two other Let's Go Washington initiatives failed¹. Voters weighed this question on its own merits, apart from the rest of the ballot, and backed the girls.

Let's Go Washington founder Brian Heywood put the case on election night: "There can be a solution in the trans sports arena, but it shouldn't come at the cost of every girl that wants to compete²." The plaintiffs lost that argument with the voters, so now they ask one King County judge to overrule more than half the electorate.

The law verifies sex for girls’ teams

What did voters actually approve? A routine check at a visit families already make. To play on a girls-only team, a girl must verify her sex during a routine sports physical, using reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup or normal endogenously produced testosterone levels. The Washington State Standard notes that all students must already get a doctor's approval to be eligible for school sports¹. That check puts a clear sex-based boundary around girls’ teams.

Without the law, the rule is the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association's policy, which lets student-athletes compete on teams aligned with their gender identity. The association says about 10 student-athletes have disclosed being transgender, but it does not require disclosure. Under that policy a mother has no assurance about who is on her daughter's team, and I-638 gives her one¹.

The privacy claim challenges sex-based teams

The plaintiffs answer that the check itself is the harm. They say the initiative unlawfully imposes "an intrusive sex-verification regime" on girls that won't be required of boys¹. They argue it intrudes on students' privacy rights under Article 1, Section 7 of the state constitution. They also argue it violates the state Equal Rights Amendment by putting the requirement on girls and not boys².

Both arguments get the law backward. Equal rights for women have always included teams of their own, and a law that keeps those teams for girls carries out that promise.

The privacy claim also runs into the doctor's visit every athlete already makes. If a physical is acceptable when it clears a child to play, why does it become an intrusion when it also confirms she is a girl?

The state must defend I-638 in full

The court fight now turns on the attorney general, who has already stated the duty. "When a new law is passed by the people or the Legislature, our role is to ensure it is defended regardless of our personal views about the policy," said AG spokesperson Mike Faulk¹. That duty calls for a full defense, with no half-hearted brief and no settlement that trims the law.

Let's Go Washington executive director Darren Littell has said what families expect: "We look forward to the Attorney General defending the law enacted by Washington State voters and expect the OSPI and WIAA to ensure that all school districts protect fairness for girls' starting on December 3rd¹." The WIAA says it will have all necessary changes in place by Dec. 3. It says it will send updated forms to schools once its review is complete².

The Washington Education Association chose to sign a suit against a law that protects the girls its members teach. Parents whose daughters train for a roster spot, a place on the team or a scholarship should remember which side the union took.

Watch three things: the attorney general's response in King County Superior Court, any request for an order to halt the law, and the WIAA forms that reach your school¹. Washington voters made their decision, the attorney general must defend it in full, and the court should let I-638 take effect on Dec. 3.

Sources

1. Parents, groups sue over transgender student-athletes initiative • Washington State Standard
2. ACLU files lawsuit to prevent voter-approved girls' sports initiative from becoming law
3. @thehoffather on X, 2026-11-10: DEVELOPING: ACLU-WA and Pacifica Law Group have filed a lawsuit to prevent IL-638 from going into effect. The law will keep boys out of girls' sports Voters approved the initiative last week by 11 points., 2026-11-10