Two legal battles over transgender athletes competing in female sports are unfolding in a federal court in New Hampshire, making the state a critical one to watch as the topic has become a central part of a culture war raging across America. 

One of the lawsuits, Tirrell v. Edelblut, challenges the state’s recently-enacted “Fairness in Women’s in Sports Act,” which bans biological males — determined by the sex listed on a birth certificate — from competing in female-designated sports in grades 5-12.

A separate lawsuit, Fellers v. Kelley, centers around whether parents have the right to wear wristbands as a form of protest over biological males competing in female sports. The lawsuits have separate hearings scheduled in New Hampshire’s federal district court on Thursday.

The cases come as transgender issues — especially relating to whether transgender athletes can play in female sports — became a major topic in President-elect Trump’s campaign and policy platform. Ahead of his election, he promised to “end left-wing gender insanity.” 

“We will keep men out of women’s sports, ban Taxpayer funding for sex change surgeries, and stop Taxpayer-funded Schools from promoting gender transition, reverse Biden’s radical rewrite of Title IX Education Regulations, and restore protections for women and girls,” his platform stated.

The Supreme Court is also set to weigh in on the topic this term, with oral arguments scheduled for December 4 in a case involving Tennessee’s ban on “gender-affirming care” for minors. The case is expected to bring further national attention to transgender-related laws and have ripple effects across more than 20 states.

In one of the lawsuits moving forward on Thursday, two transgender students, Parker Tirrell, 15, and Iris Turmelle, 14, are seeking to be able to play on female sports teams at their schools despite a state law banning it. Their attorneys argue in the lawsuit that preventing the students — who both are receiving puberty blockers and hormone therapy to block male characteristics and “physical changes caused by testosterone” — can’t be discriminated against based on their sex and transgender status under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause. 

The state, as the Sun has reported, has defended its law as a necessary measure to protect “fairness, integrity, and safety of middle and high school competition among female athletes.”

In September, the federal judge presiding over the case, Landya McCafferty, temporarily blocked New Hampshire from being able to enforce the law — therefore allowing the transgender athletes to compete on female teams — as the litigation proceeded. She wrote that playing on a boys’ team is not a “realistic option” for either athlete, as their healthcare providers have made it clear that they need to “live and participate in the world as a girl.” Playing on a boys’ team would be damaging to each athlete’s mental health and “exacerbate symptoms of gender dysphoria,” the judge wrote.

The other lawsuit with a hearing scheduled for Thursday deals with the extent to which parents and family members have a right to protest transgender athletes at school sporting events. The plaintiffs in the case — three parents and a grandparent — said their First Amendment rights were trampled on when the officials for Bow School District threatened them and barred them from school grounds after they protested a policy allowing a biological male to play on the opposing girls’ soccer team. 

The opposing female soccer team was that of Plymouth Regional High School, which is the team that hosts Parker Tirrell — the transgender student in the other lawsuit. The parents had worn pink wristbands marked with “XX,” representing the female chromosomes, as a form of “silent protest” during the game. 

In October, the judge presiding over that case, Steven McAuliffe, restored the ability of one of the parents to go to the games as long as he didn’t protest, as the New Hampshire Bulletin reported, but the judge left bigger questions unanswered about the extent to which school districts can restrict parental speech about transgender athletes in female sports. Thursday’s hearing will be a chance for both sides to establish clearer facts and evidence about the game.

The school district, in a prehearing brief, argues that the parents “refused” to remove the wristbands and that one plaintiff refused to “obey a police officer who repeatedly instructed him to leave the area.” They argue that urgency for “injunctive relief is now moot” since the fall sports season has now ended.

Attorneys for the parent protesters say that regardless of the end of the fall sports season, the plaintiffs intend to keep wearing the wristbands at school events, and without legal relief, they could face sanctions again from the school. 

The parents have argued that schools have a duty to “protect unpopular expression and teach students about the central role that freedom of speech, assembly, and petition play in our democracy.” They say the school district officials “abandoned their educational mission and instead censored spectators at a soccer game open to the public who silently protested in support of women’s sports and against the inclusion of biological males in women’s sports.” 

The Sun has reached out to parties of both sides, in each lawsuit, for comment.