A Washington high school wrestler identified in court papers as K.M.K. and her mother have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to order the state to bar transgender athletes from girls’ sports while their case is appealed. Washington officials oppose the request, and the Court has not ruled.
The dispute reaches the Court months after the justices’ sports decision, a subject our transgender history and education hub places in broader context. This report draws on the Supreme Court docket, Courthouse News Service, Education Week and Fox News. It describes allegations and legal arguments that no court has resolved, and it is not legal advice.
What did the Supreme Court application ask for?
The application asks the Court to issue an injunction requiring Washington to bar transgender athletes from girls’ sports, and to let K.M.K.’s mother opt her out of matches against transgender athletes without penalty. Meanwhile, the appeal in the lower courts continues.
According to the Supreme Court docket for No. 26A458, the application for an injunction pending appeal was submitted on October 2, 2026, to Justice Elena Kagan and docketed on October 6. The case is captioned K.M.K., by her next friend and mother, Stephanie Lynne Brown, v. Washington Interscholastic Activities Association (WIAA) and others, and it arises from a Ninth Circuit appeal, No. 26-5488. Courthouse News Service reports that the family is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom and sued the WIAA and the Puyallup School District this summer.
Two legal theories are in play. K.M.K. contends that allowing a transgender athlete in girls’ wrestling violates Title IX, the federal law barring sex discrimination in education programs that receive federal money. Her mother contends that the policies interfere with her parental rights over decisions about her daughter’s health and safety. Reporting differs on which precedents the filing leans on most. Courthouse News describes the parental-rights request as relying on Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025), while Education Week reports that it relies on Mirabelli v. Bonta, decided in March 2026.
LGBTQ Nation reports that K.M.K. says she would miss the girls’ wrestling season, which begins in November, if relief is not granted.
What allegations sit behind the case?
The family alleges that K.M.K. was sexually assaulted by a transgender opponent during a girls’ wrestling match in December 2025, an allegation that no court has resolved.
Because the people involved are students, this report uses the initials that appear in the court filings and does not name the opponent. Courthouse News reports that state prosecutors declined to charge the athlete. Fox News reports that Pierce County prosecutors cited an inability to prove third-degree rape beyond a reasonable doubt or to overcome a consent defense under case law governing athletic contests. Both outlets describe the Puyallup School District’s own Title IX investigation as pending, and Courthouse News adds that the U.S. Department of Education opened an investigation into whether the district violated federal law by allowing transgender athletes in girls’ sports. None of those investigations has produced a published finding in the reporting reviewed for this article.
What happened in the lower courts?
A federal district court and the Ninth Circuit each declined to grant interim relief before the family turned to the Supreme Court.
Courthouse News reports that the district court rejected K.M.K.’s Title IX claims at this stage. It found a factual question about whether transgender athletes pose a safety risk or a competitive disadvantage to girls, and it denied the mother’s parental-rights claim, declining to direct how extracurricular sports are run. The Ninth Circuit then declined to stay that ruling. Fox News reporting from its OutKick sports site dates those decisions to August 23 and September 25. These were rulings on requests for early relief, not final decisions on the merits of the lawsuit.
What do Washington officials say in response?
All three respondents asked the Court to deny the application, though they argue it on different grounds.
According to the Fox News account of the October 13 filings, the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction and Superintendent Chris Reykdal wrote that “The ‘irreparable’ nature of Applicants’ claimed harm is manufactured” and that the family had “sought emergency relief three times despite there not being any true emergency.” They pointed to a gap of roughly six months between the match and the lawsuit, and they wrote that “But the Constitution does not entitle parents to bespoke athletic rules.” They also cited the November 3 ballot measure as a reason for the justices to stay out.
The Puyallup School District, as reported, disputed that it failed to accommodate K.M.K., citing counseling, an independent investigation, and expedited approval of a school transfer. It said it cannot change national wrestling rules, control every bracket or disclose another student’s transgender status, and that K.M.K. may decline matches without district-imposed consequences. Fox News notes that this does not erase a forfeit or loss recorded under national wrestling rules.
The WIAA argued, as reported, that Title IX does not apply to it because it is a private nonprofit that receives no federal funds, citing NCAA v. Smith (1999). It also said no forfeit penalty has been imposed on K.M.K., that any such penalty would be discretionary, and that its board has not considered her case. Its lawyers wrote that “An injunction a defendant cannot obey is not a remedy; it is a contempt trap.” The association had earlier said it follows Washington law, which permits athletes to compete consistent with their gender identity, and that it can revise its policies if state law changes.
The respondents shared one position. Each said the Court’s recent sports decision left open whether Title IX bars schools from letting transgender girls play on girls’ teams, and each urged the justices to let the Ninth Circuit finish its review first.
How did the applicants reply?
The applicants answered on October 15 that the respondents were shifting responsibility to one another. According to Fox News coverage of the reply, their lawyers wrote that “Exit isn’t accommodation. It’s the injury,” and that “Defendants each disclaim full power, but in so doing, they ignore that together they hold it all.”
The reply also offered an alternative on the parental-rights claim. If officials know or have reason to know an opponent is transgender, they would withdraw K.M.K. or notify her mother so she could withdraw her, with the most favorable forfeiture treatment the rules allow. On timing, the applicants said the district’s appellate brief is due November 19, three days after wrestling practices begin, and that the extension was granted over their objection.
How does the case relate to West Virginia v. B.P.J.?
The Court’s June 30, 2026 decision in West Virginia v. B.P.J. allowed states to bar transgender girls from girls’ teams, but it did not decide whether Title IX requires them to do so.
Education Week reports that Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion upholding the Idaho and West Virginia laws. In a footnote, he wrote that the broader question “is currently the subject of litigation in some lower courts” and that “Nothing in this opinion is intended to decide that question.” Washington has no such ban. Its association follows a state law that permits participation consistent with gender identity, which is why this case asks the opposite question from the one the Court answered.
Education Week lists other unresolved litigation on that question. A federal judge in California dismissed a Justice Department suit on August 31, 2026, concluding that Title IX and its regulations do not clearly require excluding transgender girls, while Justice Department suits against Minnesota and Maine remain pending. For related coverage, see our reports on the dismissal of the Riley Gaines Title IX suit and on the Supreme Court decision on state sports bans. As Brianna wrote in A Solution in Search of a Problem, she has argued that laws barring transgender girls from school sports address a problem far smaller than the public debate suggests, and she proposed measuring current hormone levels rather than relying on a birth-certificate test. That is her opinion, and it is not a finding in this case.
How does the Washington ballot measure fit in?
Washington voters will decide Initiative IL26-638, a measure on transgender students in school sports, on November 3, 2026.
As described in our report on the Colorado and Washington ballot measures, IL26-638 would prohibit biologically male students from competing with and against female students and would require provider verification of sex. The state’s filing cited the vote as a reason to delay, while the applicants ask for an order now. For readers new to the legal vocabulary, our politics guide and reference library FAQs define the terms used here.
What happens next?
The Court has not said when it will act, and its docket showed no order as of October 19, 2026.
The most recent docket entry is the applicants’ October 15 reply. Under the Court’s emergency procedures, a single justice addresses an application like this and may rule on it or refer it to the full Court. Any decision on the application would address only interim relief. The merits of the Title IX and parental-rights claims remain before the lower courts, and the Ninth Circuit appeal continues. Readers who want the primary record can follow the case on the docket linked above.
Frequently asked questions
What is K.M.K. v. Washington Interscholastic Activities Association?
It is a Supreme Court emergency application, No. 26A458, in which a Washington high school wrestler identified as K.M.K. and her mother ask the Court to order the state to bar transgender athletes from girls’ sports while their appeal proceeds.
Has the Supreme Court ruled on the request?
No. The docket showed no order as of October 19, 2026. The most recent entry was the applicants’ reply, filed October 15.
Who opposes the application?
The Puyallup School District, the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association, and the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, with Superintendent Chris Reykdal, each filed responses on October 13 asking the Court to deny it.
Have the allegations in the case been proven?
No. The family alleges that K.M.K. was sexually assaulted during a December 2025 match. Prosecutors declined to charge the opponent, and the school district’s Title IX investigation was reported as pending. No court has made findings on the allegation.
Did West Virginia v. B.P.J. require Washington to ban transgender athletes?
No. According to Education Week, the June 30, 2026 decision upheld state bans but did not decide whether Title IX requires them, and the majority wrote that nothing in the opinion was intended to decide that question.
Which Washington ballot measure relates to this issue?
Initiative IL26-638 would prohibit biologically male students from competing with and against female students and require provider verification of sex. It is on the November 3, 2026 ballot.
Continue Exploring
More in Politics