What Is HR 28? Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act

H.R. 28, the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025, is a bill that would amend Title IX to make it a federal violation for any school receiving federal funds to let athletes who were male at birth compete on women’s or girls’ teams. The House passed it on January 14, 2025. The Senate received it the next day and, as of early 2026, has not moved it.

What the Bill Would Change in Title IX

The bill adds a new subsection to Section 901 of the Education Amendments of 1972, the provision that already prohibits sex discrimination in any education program receiving federal money.¹ Under the new language, it would be a Title IX violation for a federally funded school or institution to allow a person whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program designated for women or girls.²

The rule reaches every athletic program operated, sponsored, or facilitated by a federally funded school, including any program that requires participation on an athletic team. In states that have no eligibility law of their own, the bill would create a federal floor that any school taking federal money would have to meet.

How the Bill Defines Sex

The bill defines sex “based solely on a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.”² That definition is the operating mechanism of the whole statute. For purposes of athletic eligibility, no amount of hormone therapy, surgery, or legal gender change would move an athlete from one category to the other. A person identified as male at birth would remain ineligible for women’s teams at a federally funded school regardless of any later transition.

The bill does not spell out a verification procedure. It sets the classification standard and leaves the mechanics of how schools confirm eligibility to be worked out in enforcement.

The Practice and Training Exception

The bill has one significant carve-out. A school may allow male-born athletes to train or practice with a women’s team, so long as doing so does not deprive any female athlete of a tangible benefit. The bill lists the benefits that cannot be taken away: a roster spot, the chance to compete in a game or match, a scholarship, admission to an educational institution, or any other benefit tied to participating in the program.²

So a transgender female athlete at a federally funded school could still practice with a women’s team, but could not appear on the competition roster, take a scholarship tied to the women’s program, or fill a spot that would otherwise go to a female athlete. The dividing line between practice and competition is where most day-to-day questions will arise, especially in sports where scrimmages and practice blend together.

How the Rule Would Be Enforced

Because the bill frames the ban as a Title IX violation rather than creating a separate penalty, enforcement runs through the process that already exists for other Title IX complaints. That process typically begins with voluntary compliance efforts. If those fail, the federal government can move to suspend or terminate federal funding for the specific program where the violation occurred. The Department of Justice can also sue in federal court on behalf of the enforcing agency.

The consequence a school actually faces, then, is loss of federal money tied to the offending program, not a fine or criminal penalty against any individual.

The GAO Study the Bill Orders

H.R. 28 directs the Government Accountability Office to study the effects of allowing male-born athletes to participate in women’s sports. The study has two tasks. First, it must define what “any other benefit” means in the context of the practice exception, identifying the full range of advantages female athletes gain from sex-separated programs. Second, it must document negative psychological, developmental, and sociological effects on girls displaced from or discouraged from participating in sports.² Specific focus areas include lost roster spots, lost scholarship opportunities, displacement from admission, and deprivation of environments free from sexual harassment.

The GAO must submit its findings to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. The bill sets no deadline for the report.

Where the Bill Stands

Representative Greg Steube, a Florida Republican, introduced H.R. 28 on January 3, 2025, the first day of the 119th Congress.³ It had 83 cosponsors, all Republicans.⁴

The House passed the bill on January 14, 2025, by a vote of 218 to 206, with one member voting “present.” All 216 voting Republicans supported it. Two Democrats voted in favor, 206 opposed, and one voted “present.”⁵

The Senate received the bill on January 15, 2025.³ As of early 2026, no Senate vote has been scheduled and no committee hearings have been announced. The likely committee of jurisdiction is Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. The chief obstacle is the filibuster: most standalone bills need 60 votes to advance, and the crossover support required does not appear to exist. The Trump administration’s parallel executive action on the same subject may also reduce the political urgency to pass a statute, though a statute would be far more durable than an executive order.

How the Bill Fits With Existing Rules

H.R. 28 is not the only source of rules on this question. In February 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” which set a policy of rescinding federal funds from education programs found to deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities.⁶ An executive order can be reversed by a future president; a statute cannot.

Also in February 2025, the NCAA updated its transgender participation policy to bar athletes assigned male at birth from competing on NCAA women’s teams while still permitting them to practice and receive other student-athlete benefits.⁷ The NCAA policy tracks H.R. 28’s competition-versus-practice line closely, and the NCAA has acknowledged that federal, state, and local legislation supersedes its own rules.

At the state level, roughly 27 states have enacted laws restricting transgender students from participating in sports consistent with their gender identity, and about two more have imposed similar restrictions through agency regulations. Courts have temporarily blocked enforcement in at least four states. If H.R. 28 becomes law, the federal rule would apply to any school taking federal funds in any state, regardless of what state law says.

1
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 20 USC 1681 – Sex
2
Congress.gov. Text – H.R.28 – 119th Congress (2025-2026): Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025
3
Congress.gov. H.R.28 – 119th Congress (2025-2026): Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025
4
Congressman Greg Steube. Steube’s Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act Passes U.S. House in Bipartisan Vote
5
House Clerk’s Office. Roll Call 12 – Bill Number: HR 28
6
The White House. Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports
7
NCAA. NCAA Announces Transgender Student-Athlete Participation Policy Change