A Washington high school wrestler’s Supreme Court fight could help bring restrictions on transgender athletes in girls’ sports to 23 states, an attorney representing her told OutKick.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) senior counsel Hal Frampton said the ultimate objective is a ruling establishing that Title IX requires a protected female sports category, with consequences beyond the immediate request to protect wrestler Kallie Keeler.
“And the hope would be then that that would force all 23 of those states to enact policies protecting women and girls, protecting the female category, and simply getting back to the common sense notion that women’s sports are for women,” Frampton said.
Keeler, identified in court as K.M.K., and her mother, Stephanie Lynne Brown, are seeking intervention after Keeler alleged she was sexually assaulted by a transgender opponent during a girls’ wrestling match in December 2025.
“Ultimately, the goal is a ruling from the Supreme Court that says that Title IX requires fairness and safety for women and girls,” Frampton said.
Asked whether that broader objective could be accomplished through the current Supreme Court application or would require further steps, Frampton called it “a huge step toward accomplishing that goal.”
The application seeks an injunction pending appeal and alternatively asks the justices to take up the case before the Ninth Circuit finishes reviewing it. A temporary order protecting Keeler would not, by itself, impose new eligibility policies on 23 states.
INSIDE THE SUPREME COURT BATTLE TO ‘SAVE WOMEN’S SPORTS’
The distinction matters because the Ninth Circuit said the Supreme Court’s recent West Virginia v. B.P.J. decision left open whether schools may allow biological males who identify as female to participate in girls’ and women’s sports. Frampton’s goal would address that unresolved question.
For Keeler, Frampton said, the immediate concern is returning to wrestling before her remaining high school seasons slip away.
“We filed the emergency application with the Supreme Court because it’s really the only way to get Callie and her family relief in advance of wrestling season,” he said.
Frampton emphasized that the emergency request seeks protection for Keeler rather than monetary damages, though he left open the possibility of pursuing damages later.
“For right now, all we’re saying is while this case is pending,” give her assurance she can compete without being matched against a male athlete, he said. He accused Washington officials of refusing to compromise: “From the very beginning, there’s been no effort to compromise, to accommodate Callie, to appreciate what she’s been through.”
Justice Elena Kagan has requested a response to the application by 4 p.m. EDT Oct. 13. The request remained pending as of Friday. Washington’s wrestling season begins in mid-November.
The Ninth Circuit denied emergency relief Sept. 25, finding the family had not established an immediate emergency or a sufficiently strong likelihood of success. It also raised concerns about other students’ privacy and the breadth of the requested relief, while noting the district had said Keeler could forfeit matches without district-imposed adverse consequences.
Frampton rejected the privacy justification and accused Washington officials of refusing to accommodate Keeler.
“From the very beginning, there’s been no effort to compromise, to accommodate Callie, to appreciate what she’s been through,” he said.
The WIAA previously said it would follow state law allowing participation by gender identity and revise its policies if that law changes.
Pierce County prosecutors declined to charge Keeler’s opponent, concluding they could not prove third-degree rape beyond a reasonable doubt or overcome a consent defense arising from case law on athletic contests. The prosecutor emphasized that the decision did not mean approval of the alleged conduct.
Frampton said the experience has taken a toll on Keeler and her family, including her transfer to another school.
“She ultimately had to change schools in order to get away from the harassment and bullying and the just lack of concern from the administration, which is not easy for any high school student to do,” he said.
Still, he described the family as determined to continue pursuing the case.
“High school careers are fleeting. She’s already a junior. Blink and it’ll be over. And we just don’t want her to miss out on the opportunity to compete in high school athletics,” Frampton said.
The family’s request has drawn support from 24 states, led by Iowa and Idaho, which filed a brief Oct. 7 arguing that allowing biological males into female sports denies girls Title IX protections.
The Independent Council on Women’s Sports (ICONS) and its members also filed an amicus brief Oct. 8 supporting Keeler’s emergency request, arguing that school administrators bear responsibility under Title IX for protecting female athletes. The brief contends that lost athletic opportunities cause irreparable harm and that privacy concerns should not prevent schools from identifying competitors’ biological sex.
“It is unreasonable for school administrators to attempt to shift the burden of protecting girls in school sports to parents and children,” the brief states.
OutKick reached out to the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association, Puyallup School District and the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction for comment on Frampton’s latest statements.
In its previous response to the injunction request, the WIAA said it would continue following Washington law allowing students to compete according to their gender identity and could revise its policies if the law changes. “The WIAA will not comment further on a matter in litigation,” the association said.
The superintendent’s office said it does not oversee athletics but is responsible for communicating and enforcing applicable law. “OSPI will continue to uphold Washington’s current law unless or until the law changes.” It added that it had issued no non-privileged statement, board notice or guidance to schools or staff regarding the appeal.
Puyallup School District previously acknowledged receiving the Supreme Court application and said it would respond if requested by the Court, “in accordance with the Court’s rules and established process.” Its statement did not specify whether it would oppose the application or provide the advance notice sought by Keeler’s mother.
