A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by eight Colorado school districts and charter schools seeking protection from potential enforcement of the state’s transgender nondiscrimination rules, finding that the schools failed to show they were actually being harmed.
Senior U.S. District Judge John Kane ruled Wednesday that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge Colorado officials over policies affecting transgender student athletes. The decision affirmed a January recommendation from U.S. Magistrate Judge Maritza Dominguez Braswell.
At the heart of the case was a fairly basic legal problem: The schools wanted a federal court to protect them from consequences that, so far, had not happened.
Districts Challenged Colorado Protections
The lawsuit was spearheaded by School District 49 after its board adopted a policy in May 2025 prohibiting transgender middle and high school students from participating on teams matching their gender identity.
Seven other districts and charter organizations later joined the case: Colorado Springs District 11, Academy District 20, Montezuma-Cortez School District, James Irwin Charter Schools, Monument Academy, the Classical Academy and Education reEnvisioned BOCES.
They challenged Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act and its gender identity protections, arguing state officials could investigate or penalize schools enforcing sex-based athletic and facility policies.
There was one problem: Colorado hadn’t done that.
According to the court, the plaintiffs presented no evidence that state officials had taken enforcement action against them. They also failed to identify a transgender student whose treatment under one of the policies had triggered a discrimination complaint that could lead to enforcement.
Kane concluded that the possibility of some future lawsuit or state action wasn’t enough to establish the concrete injury necessary for standing.
“I cannot infer a speculated lawsuit or enforcement action would arise if, no transgender student, who would be subjected to discrimination, exists,” Kane wrote.
No Standing to Speak for Every Student
The districts also attempted to bring claims on behalf of their students, but that argument didn’t survive either.
Kane agreed with the magistrate judge that school officials could not simply assume all students shared their position on transgender participation in athletics. Students themselves may have very different views about whether transgender classmates should participate on teams matching their gender identity.
The ruling comes after the Colorado High School Activities Association reached a separate settlement with the plaintiffs in December 2025. CHSAA agreed not to penalize districts maintaining restrictive transgender athlete policies. The organization had also said it had never previously penalized a district for such a policy.
District 49 Superintendent Peter Hilts said the district disagrees with Kane’s decision and is considering what to do next.
Kane also rejected arguments that a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision permitting states to restrict transgender participation in school sports changed the outcome.
That decision, he explained, did not eliminate the constitutional requirement that plaintiffs demonstrate standing before a federal court can hear their claims.
In other words, whatever larger political fight school officials hoped to wage over transgender athletes, they still needed an actual legal injury to get through the courthouse door.
