MINNEAPOLIS — Chief Justice Natalie Hudson leaned forward into her microphone and captured the sentiment of the case being argued before the Minnesota Supreme Court on Tuesday morning, “We are peeling the onion here,” Hudson said.

The justices were hearing oral arguments over a civil lawsuit alleging discrimination against a woman who was not allowed to compete in a USA Powerlifting competition in Maplewood in 2019 because she was transgender.

The attorney representing JayCee Cooper, of Minneapolis, said the decision to exclude her from competition was blatant discrimination on the basis of her sexual orientation. The attorney representing USA Powerlifting said the decision had nothing to do with Cooper being transgender but instead was about competitive fairness in sport and the innate biological advantages that a person who went through puberty as a male has in weightlifting.

The case has been moving through Minnesota courts for nearly four years after it was initially filed in Ramsey County in January of 2021. The intimate nature of the dispute has been overshadowed by the national discussion around transgender rights in America.

Attorney Christy Hall, representing Cooper, stood in front of the justices and said the language USA Powerlifting used to exclude her client from competition was “undisputed, dispositive, direct evidence” of discrimination that violated the Minnesota Human Rights Act.

She pointed specifically to a statement from USAPL president Larry Maile where he said, “We do not allow male to female transgender athletes at all.”

“This is not a close case,” Hall said.

Ansis Viksnins, the attorney representing USA Powerlifting, disagreed. So did a Minnesota Court of Appeals panel which reversed and remanded several summary judgements that were ordered by Ramsey County District Court judge Patrick Diamond in 2023 which largely sided with Cooper.

Viksnins argued on Tuesday that those judgements granted by Diamond — including that Cooper had provided enough evidence to prove USA Powerlifting had discriminated against her based on sexual orientation and damages should be determined — undermined decades of Minnesota legal standards. “The district court here turned all of that case law and statutory language upon its head,” Viksnins said.

He explained that USA Powerlifting “made a decision that Ms. Cooper should not be allowed to compete in the women’s division because of her male physiology. It had nothing to do with her present gender identity, the reason for differentiation was her male physiology.”

Viksnins said if there are questions about whether USA Powerlifting discriminated against Cooper according to the Minnesota Human Rights Act, it “must be handled at trial” because there are clear issues of fact.

Cooper had been an athlete her entire life. Growing up she played soccer and tee-ball and participated in wrestling, track and field and curling in high school. She was very adept at curling, competing at the U.S. junior national team level at the World Juniors in 2007.

When she was 28, she legally changed her name to Jaycee as she transitioned her sexual identity from male to female. She continued to pursue a sporting life. She became involved in roller derby “specifically attracted by its trans-inclusive policy” and after breaking an ankle in 2017, she started powerlifting.

In 2018, Cooper purchased an annual membership with USA Powerlifting to compete in events in Minnesota in 2019 and was quickly approved. Not long after, she sent in a “Therapeutic Use Exemptions Standard Process” form which detailed her treatment for “Gender Dysphoria.”

Cooper wanted approval for her prescribed use of spironolactone, a medication which can be used by transgender women to lower the amount of testosterone the body makes. Her request set off a chain of communication between several departments within USA Powerlifting — including its therapeutic use exemption committee and executive committee.

The therapeutic use exemption committee was ready to approve Cooper’s use of spironolactone, but one of the members sent a question to Maile, asking, “Do we allow male-to-female transgenders to compete as females?” Maile responded they do not.

USA Powerlifting had an internal policy, not written or stated, that transgender women who were born male were not allowed to compete as female.

The justices pushed against Viksnins, questioning how there’s any way the language USA Powerlifting uses to not allow transgender women from competing as females could be viewed as anything but discriminatory.

“If this isn’t direct evidence, that’s not direct evidence, what ever would be?” Chief Justice Hudson asked. “What would be required here?”

And while Viksnins and USA Powerlifting gave several scientific and evidence based reasons for why a transgender woman who had gone through puberty as a male had a distinct advantage in the sport, Hall noted that reasoning had long been an excuse for discrimination.

She pointed to restaurant owners who used to not allow Black customers to sit with white customers because it would upset their white customers. She pointed to Pan American airlines not allowing male flight attendants because their customers preferred females.

“There is often a rationale,” Hall said.

Viksnins noted those examples lacked a “legitimate. non-discriminatory reason” for why a business made the decision. When it came to USA Powerlifting, he noted that gender isn’t the only category it uses to determine who can compete. Weightlifters are separated by age and weight, as well.

“This is not a mixed motive case,” Viksnins said. “The motive here was to separate biological males into a category where they are competing against other people who were born biologically male.”

Justice Sarah Hennesy asked Viksnins to define what makes a person biologically male and he said it was about biological birth sex, reproductive organs and chromosomes. Justice Paul Thissen noted that male physiology often differs dramatically from person-to-person. “Why can’t you put it into an individualized approach?” he asked.

Viksnins responded that almost all sporting competitions and leagues separate by gender.

There was an additional element to this case that raised its stature, and that was Hall’s request that not only should the Minnesota Supreme Court side with her client and reinstate the summary judgements from the Ramsey County District Court, but they should also undo the 2001 state Supreme Court decision in Goins v. West Group.

That case set a standard not only in Minnesota but in legal cases around the country regarding transgender rights in public accommodations. In that case, Julienne Goins, a transgender woman, accused her employer, West Group, of discriminating against her by not allowing her to use the women’s restroom at their office in Eagan.

The state supreme court ultimately ruled “an employer’s designation of employee restroom use based on biological gender is not sexual orientation discrimination in violation of the MHRA.” Justices Alan Page and Paul Anderson added a special concurrence to that opinion which went a step further and noted that Goins had failed to prove she was biologically female.

Hall said that while Cooper’s case vs. USA Powerlifting could be decided without it, “this court should overrule the Goins decision.” Hall noted that courts across the country have become more attuned to discrimination against transgender people, “because in reality treating transgender women different from other women is at the heart of gender discrimination.”

Viksnins argued that Goins “has been good law in Minnesota for 23 years.”

“It should be followed,” Viksnins said. “What’s the proper analytical tool for this case? It’s exactly how Goins analyzed the issue about transgender women using the bathroom … that is biological sex separation and that is exactly what we say here and why the exemption has applicability.”

Transgender rights have become a ferocious talking point in the national political and legal arena. On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in United States v. Skrmetti, a challenge to a Tennessee law that prohibits some medical treatments for transgender youths.

How the Minnesota Supreme Court rules on Cooper v. USA Powerlifting could have wide-ranging impact, and that was represented Tuesday.

Advocates with Gender Justice packed the courtroom and the Capitol rotunda saying the decision by USA Powerlifting was another attempt at pushing transgender people out of society.

Erin Maye Quade, the special projects advisor for Gender Justice, said Cooper is just another private citizen who, in the search to be able to live a life of her choosing, has been cast into the national spotlight.

“JayCee is many things, she is really into music, she’s an athlete,” Quade said at a news conference at the Capitol while Cooper stood behind her. “We were sitting in our office the other day and she’s like, ‘Once this case is over, hopefully I can just go back to lifting.’ Imagine being a person walking through your everyday life and all of a sudden you become a political talking point?”

Maile said USA Powerlifting is facing the exact same dilemma.

“The real tragedy for us is that it isn’t restricted to a sensible common sense discussion about performance and what makes sense in terms of categories,” Maile said after the hearing. “It’s painted as a lot of other things and it’s coopted by other people in terms of things we have no interest in — rights in general, use of restrooms, medical care. We are not interested in those. We are only interested in what occurs on the platform and how to pick it fair.”

There is no set timetable on when the Minnesota Supreme Court will issue an opinion on the case.

-------

©2024 The Minnesota Star Tribune. Visit at startribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.