Bill · S.Res. 22· Senate(119-SRES-22)
A resolution concerning the National Collegiate Athletic Association policy for eligibility in women's sports.
- Introduced
- 1/13/2025
- Last activity
- 1/13/2025 — Referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- Sponsored by
- Marsha Blackburn
- Cosponsors
- - 13 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
A Senate resolution is the Senate speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the Senate agrees to it, it is officially the Senate's word; it is not a law, so the House and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution concerns the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) policy regarding eligibility in women's sports. It addresses the biological differences between males and females and how they impact competitive advantage and safety. The resolution calls on the NCAA to revoke its current transgender student-athlete eligibility policy. It further requests that the NCAA forbid transgender-identifying males from competing on women's rosters or in collegiate competition. Additionally, it urges member conferences to adopt a biological sex-based policy across all divisions. Finally, it calls on all sports-governing bodies in the United States to protect the category of women's sports for biological women and girls.
Yes· 3 of 4
Would women be better off under this?+8
The resolution explicitly targets the protection of female athletic categories and the reduction of competitive disadvantages faced by women.
Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated?+7
The resolution seeks to protect the integrity and opportunities of female athletes by limiting competition to biological females.
Would children be better off under this?+5
The resolution emphasizes protecting the physical and psychological health of young girls through sports competition.
The opposite
Would LGBTQ people be better off under this?-9
The resolution calls for the revocation of transgender eligibility policies and the prohibition of transgender-identifying males from women's sports.
Does this make it easier to use public money at a school other than the local one?-2
The mandate to restrict eligibility based on biological sex may impact the equitable distribution of athletic opportunities in postsecondary institutions.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of Female Athletes: The resolution states that the current NCAA policy disproportionately negatively impacts female athletes and that there are biological differences that put females at a competitive disadvantage and jeopardize their safety. By revoking the current policy and forbidding transgender-identifying males from women's rosters, it aims to protect the integrity of women's sports (Resolution Sections 1, 2, and 4).
-
Ensuring Equality of Opportunities: The text notes that member institutions have an obligation under title IX to ensure equality of benefits and opportunities in athletic programs on the basis of sex. The resolution's call to protect the category of women's sport is presented as a way to protect opportunities for collegiate women to compete athletically (Resolution Section 4 and Preamble).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Impact on Transgender Student-Athletes: The resolution calls for the NCAA to revoke its current eligibility policy and forbids transgender-identifying males from competing on any women's sports roster or in any collegiate competition (Resolution Sections 1 and 2).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Women+8Good For Children+5Good For Young Adults+4Good For L G B T Q Community-9
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Gender Equality+7
- Education And Technology
- Improves School Choice-2
- 1/15/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 1/13/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- 11 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
John BarrassoRepublican · Wyoming
Mike CrapoRepublican · Idaho
Ted CruzRepublican · Texas
Steve DainesRepublican · Montana
Joni ErnstRepublican · Iowa
Cindy Hyde-SmithRepublican · Mississippi
James LankfordRepublican · Oklahoma
Roger MarshallRepublican · Kansas
James RischRepublican · Idaho
Tim SheehyRepublican · Montana
Tommy TubervilleRepublican · Alabama
Thomas TillisRepublican · North Carolina
Roger WickerRepublican · Mississippi