When Becky Pepper-Jackson talks about shot put, one of her favorite track and field events, she keeps it simple.
“It’s just throwing something that’s heavy,” the 15-year-old said with a grin. “Far.”
That description could just as easily apply to the legal fight she now carries — a case whose consequences stretch far beyond her high school track meets in West Virginia and straight to the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Pepper-Jackson, a transgender sophomore, is one of the students at the center of a pair of appeals the Supreme Court will hear Tuesday challenging state laws that ban transgender girls from competing on women’s sports teams. The cases arrive before a 6–3 conservative court that has, in recent years, repeatedly ruled against LGBTQ Americans.
Pepper-Jackson is under no illusions about the odds.
“Someone has to do this because this is just a terrible thing,” she told CNN in an interview alongside her family and attorneys. “I know that I can handle it. It’s never crossed my mind to stop, because I know I’m doing it for everybody.”
The justices will decide whether state bans like West Virginia’s violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment or Title IX, the 1972 federal law barring sex discrimination in federally funded education. The ruling, expected by the end of June, is likely to determine the fate of similar laws now on the books in more than half the states.
Pepper-Jackson says she has been a girl for as long as she can remember. She began socially transitioning in third grade and started hormone therapy by the end of sixth grade. Her attorneys emphasize that she has never experienced the effects of testosterone puberty — a key point in a legal debate often framed around physical advantage.
On the field, Pepper-Jackson doesn’t present herself as a driven phenom chasing titles at any cost. She jokes that she gravitated toward shot put and discus because she “sucked at running.” She says sports matter to her because of friendships, routine, and the life lessons that come with being part of a team.
Her personal record in discus — 120 feet — makes her proud. But it also makes her uneasy.
“What if,” she wonders, “people use that against me?”
Her mother, Heather Jackson, recalls seeing that fear flicker across her daughter’s face after a strong performance years ago. “She knew that’s what they were going to focus on,” Jackson said. “No kid should feel guilty for doing their best.”
Supporters of state bans argue that allowing transgender girls to compete undermines fairness in women’s sports. West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey told CNN that restricting girls’ teams to biological females is a matter of safety and equity.
“To say that allowing only biological females to compete in girls’ sports violates Title IX fails the commonsense test,” McCuskey said.
Court filings, however, show that West Virginia identified only one transgender athlete affected by its law: Pepper-Jackson. McCuskey said that fact doesn’t matter. “It may be that we have one defendant,” he said, “but there’s a nationwide issue here.”
Others, like former Pennsylvania high school athlete Lilyana Williams, say their opposition is not rooted in animus. Williams helped organize a policy barring transgender athletes at her school after a trans student briefly joined her team.
“Women deserve equality, both on the field and off the field,” Williams said. “We deserve a right to fairness.”
Advocacy groups argue the controversy is largely manufactured. The American Civil Liberties Union is part of Pepper-Jackson’s legal team and has challenged multiple state bans nationwide. A separate appeal before the court involves Idaho law challenged by Boise State student Lindsay Hecox.
Joshua Block, an ACLU attorney arguing Pepper-Jackson’s case, said blanket bans violate Title IX by excluding students from school programs based on sex.
“When Becky is prevented from being on teams with other girls just like her, she is subjected to discrimination,” Block said.
The legal debate will inevitably collide with the Supreme Court’s own precedents. In 2020, the court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that workplace protections “on the basis of sex” include gender identity — though the opinion emphasized it applied only to employment. If the court sides with the states now, it may need to explain why that reasoning does not extend to education and sports.
For Pepper-Jackson, the legal theories and constitutional doctrines fade into the background. What remains is the weight of being singled out — and the belief that visibility itself matters.
“Getting this far and bringing light to this case,” she said, “and showing that this is an issue — that’s a win.”
