Two traditionally Democratic-leaning US states have voted to restrict transgender students’ participation in school sports, introducing new rules that LGBTQ+ advocates warn could exclude young people from teams and subject girls to additional scrutiny.
Voters in Washington state and Colorado have approved separate ballot measures restricting participation in girls’ and women’s sports according to sex-based eligibility requirements.
The results follow the US midterm elections held on Tuesday 3 November 2026, with the Associated Press calling both measures on Thursday 5 November, US time.
Preliminary results showed Washington’s Initiative 638 receiving more than 56% support, while Colorado’s Proposition 134 secured approximately 52% of the vote.
Although the official counts have not yet been certified, the results represent a significant development in the ongoing national debate over transgender participation in school sports.
Both states have Democratic-led governments and had previously resisted introducing restrictions similar to those enacted in numerous Republican-led states.
Now, voters have approved the changes directly through the ballot box.
Washington Introduces Sex Verification For Girls’ School Sport
Washington’s Initiative 638 introduces new eligibility rules for interschool sporting competitions involving primary and secondary students.
Under the measure, students classified as male according to its biological criteria, including transgender girls, will be prohibited from competing in covered events designated for girls.
The restriction applies to both individual and team competitions.
However, the initiative introduces another significant requirement: all students seeking to participate in covered girls’ sporting competitions must provide verification from a healthcare provider.
That verification must confirm their sex according to criteria specified in the initiative, including reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup or naturally produced testosterone levels.
The requirement applies to girls generally, not exclusively transgender students.
Supporters argue the rules are necessary to protect competitive fairness and opportunities for female athletes.
Opponents say the requirements could create unnecessary barriers to participation and raise concerns about privacy, discrimination and the scrutiny placed on young athletes’ bodies.
Washington’s existing sporting policies had allowed transgender students to participate on teams consistent with their gender identity.
The new initiative represents a substantial change to that approach.
Colorado’s Restrictions Extend To University Sport
Colorado voters approved Proposition 134, a measure introducing sex-based sporting eligibility requirements across a wider range of educational institutions.
Unlike Washington’s initiative, Colorado’s rules extend from primary school through to colleges and universities.
Under the measure, schools and sporting organisations must designate teams and competitions as male, female or coeducational.
Students participating in sex-designated competitions must generally compete according to the biological classification established by the legislation.
This will prevent transgender girls and women from participating in female-designated competitions where their classification under the measure does not match the category.
Coeducational teams will remain open to all eligible participants.
The measure also allows students classified as female to compete on a male-designated team when there is no equivalent female team or sport available.
Supporters maintain that the restrictions provide clear eligibility standards and protect opportunities for girls and women in competitive sport.
LGBTQ+ advocates have criticised the measure, arguing that it excludes transgender students and could create uncertainty for families, schools and sporting organisations.
LGBTQ+ Advocates Warn Of Discrimination And Privacy Concerns
The election results have prompted concern from organisations working with transgender young people and their families.
In Washington, opponents of Initiative 638 argue the verification requirement could expose girls to unnecessary medical scrutiny.
The Washington State Parent Teacher Association opposed the measure, raising concerns about its potential effects on students’ privacy and participation.
Civil rights organisations have also indicated that legal challenges may follow.
In Colorado, LGBTQ+ advocacy organisation One Colorado has criticised Proposition 134 as an unnecessary intervention in decisions affecting students, families and schools.
Executive director Nadine Bridges previously warned that girls who are perceived as unusually tall, strong or physically different could become subject to questioning about their eligibility.
Advocates say these concerns extend beyond transgender students because eligibility disputes can affect other girls whose appearance or physical development does not match stereotypical expectations.
The full practical impact will depend on how the measures are implemented and whether any legal challenges succeed.
Why Are These Results Significant?
Restrictions on transgender athletes have become increasingly common across the United States.
More than half of US states have introduced some form of restriction on transgender participation in school sport, although the details and legal status vary.
The Washington and Colorado votes are particularly notable because both states have generally supported Democratic candidates in recent national elections.
Their legislatures had declined to enact comparable restrictions, prompting supporters of the measures to pursue citizen-led ballot initiatives instead.
The results demonstrate that views about transgender sporting participation do not necessarily align neatly with political party preferences.
However, the ballot outcomes should not be interpreted as a nationwide vote on transgender rights more broadly.
They concern specific sporting eligibility rules in two states, and neither result establishes how Americans feel about transgender people across every area of public life.
Elsewhere in the same election, voters reached different outcomes on other proposals involving transgender rights, including rejecting a measure in Missouri that combined restrictions on gender-transition healthcare with changes to abortion protections.
What Does This Mean For Rainbow Communities In Aotearoa?
For transgender, non-binary and takatāpui communities in New Zealand, the US developments highlight the continuing debate over inclusion and fairness in sport.
Participation in sport can provide young people with opportunities to build friendships, develop confidence, improve wellbeing and experience a sense of belonging.
Questions about sporting eligibility also involve issues of competitive fairness, safety and the differing requirements of recreational, school and elite competitions.
In Aotearoa, sporting organisations operate under their own eligibility frameworks, with policies differing between sports and levels of competition.
The Washington and Colorado ballot measures do not change those rules.
However, the American results are relevant to wider discussions about how sporting organisations can balance inclusion, privacy, fairness and participation.
For advocates of transgender inclusion, a central concern is ensuring that young people are not unnecessarily excluded from the social and developmental benefits of school sport.
For those supporting sex-based restrictions, the emphasis remains on protecting female sporting categories and competitive opportunities.
Both positions will continue to be part of the public debate as the new US measures move towards implementation.
What Happens Next?
Although both ballot measures have been called as approved, the election results remain subject to official certification.
Schools, educational institutions and sporting organisations will need to understand and implement their respective state’s requirements.
Legal challenges are also possible, particularly regarding discrimination, privacy and the relationship between state and federal protections.
For transgender students in Washington and Colorado, the coming months will determine how the changes affect their ability to participate in school sport.
The election results mark another significant development in the US debate over transgender inclusion, with the practical consequences now shifting from the ballot box to schools, families and the young athletes affected.
