\n
![\"Facebook](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/1778524636_981_facebook_yellow_350x350.jpg\")
\n <\/a><\/p>\n
\n\tRelated\n<\/p>\n
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and State of Texas are still fighting in a Lubbock court almost a year and-a-half after Texas sued the NCAA \u2013 saying allowing biological men to compete in women\u2019s sports was consumer fraud.<\/p>\n
The NCAA claimed the controversy is over \u2013 with President Trump signing the \u201cKeeping Men Out of Women\u2019s Sports executive order and the NCAA complying.<\/p>\n
The NCAA is asking Lubbock Judge Les Hatch in the 237th District Court to shut down the state\u2019s lawsuit. Lawyers for the state asked Hatch to proceed with the case currently set for trial in September.<\/p>\n
The case got national media attention in March of last year when nationally known former swimmer Riley Gaines testified via video feed. Other female college athletes testified in person.<\/p>\n
The NCAA requested summary judgement, saying, \u201cThe AG [Texas attorney general] would have the court believe this case is about transgender athletes\u2019 participation in women\u2019s sports. It\u2019s not.\u201d<\/p>\n
A summary judgment would shut down the case on legal grounds without the need for further evidence or going to trial.<\/p>\n
The NCAA claimed the \u201creal question\u201d is whether the AG can use a consumer protection statute \u201cfor partisan politics.\u201d The law cannot be used for \u201cgimmicks,\u201d the NCAA claimed, which means the lawsuit should get tossed out before it ever goes to trial.<\/p>\n
\u201cFirst, the perceived controversy the AG seeks to litigate no longer exists. On February 6, 2025, the NCAA\u2019s Board of Governors adopted its 2025 Policy, which categorically bars any student-athlete assigned male at birth from competing in women\u2019s sports. That policy \u2013 which copies Texas law \u2013 is clear and is being enforced,\u201d attorney Victor Vital claimed on behalf of the NCAA.<\/p>\n
Texas replied in February saying the NCAA\u2019s legal argument was \u201cmisdirection and contradiction.\u201d Texas claimed the issue was indeed consumer protection. The NCAA advertised women\u2019s sports but allowed biological men to identify as women and compete.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere are still biological men competing in the women\u2019s category,\u201d Texas claimed.<\/p>\n
According to Texas, there was a violation after the NCAA\u2019s policy went into effect.<\/p>\n
\u201c \u2026 On March 29, 2025, Ithica College allowed a transgender female \u2026 to compete on an NCAA women\u2019s rowing team in intercollegiate competition,\u201d attorney Justin Sassaman wrote on behalf of Texas.<\/p>\n
It was characterized in court records as a self-reported violation.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut despite [the] admission of guilt, the NCAA, for reasons unclear, decided to rule that no violation had occurred,\u201d Texas claimed.<\/p>\n
The rebuttal from the NCAA filed in March said of Texas, \u201cIts entire case is a referendum on transgenderism: whether transgender individuals should be classified with their sex assigned at birth or the sex with which they identify. Over the past few decades, this policy issue has been heavily debated.\u201d<\/p>\n
A policy disagreement is not the same as policy fraud, said the NCAA in its legal briefs.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Texas Legislature considered, debated, and adopted policies that, in 2025, became law. But before that there was no governing standard. The NCAA\u2019s current policy aligns with both Texas law and federal guidance,\u201d the NCAA rebuttal said.<\/p>\n
The NCAA concluded, \u201cIt would be fundamentally unfair to now hold the NCAA liable for following approaches that, at the time, were supported by federal guidance, many states, and sizable portions of the public.\u201d<\/p>\n
Timeline<\/p>\n
December 2024 \u2013 Texas sued the NCAA claiming biological men were allowed to identify as women and then compete in women\u2019s sports. Texas claimed this was a violation of Deceptive Trade Practices Act. (Texas said consumers buying tickets to women\u2019s events were misled.) The NCAA denied any deception.<\/p>\n
February 2025 \u2013 President Trump issued an executive order called \u201cKeeping Men Out of Women\u2019s Sports.\u201d The NCAA said it made changes to comply with the order.<\/p>\n
March 2025 \u2013 The court held a hearing on the state\u2019s request for a temporary injunction. Judge Hatch denied the request.<\/p>\n
June 2025 \u2013 The NCAA filed its first request for summary judgement. The request was updated in December.<\/p>\n
February 2026 \u2013 Texas replied to the NCAA\u2019s request for summary judgement.<\/p>\n
March 2026 \u2013 The NCAA filed a rebuttal.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/volunteer_activism_96dp_000000_FILL0_wght400_GRAD0_opsz48.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n