Nassau County's contentious law prohibiting transgender athletes from competing in county facilities continues to face significant legal challenges, with a recent appeals court hearing revealing skepticism among judges regarding its legality. The controversial measure, which bans transgender women from participating in sporting events at county-owned venues, was initially upheld by a State Supreme Court justice against a preliminary injunction request, but now faces a more critical examination at the appellate level.

The legal battle began when the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), representing the Long Island Roller Rebels, an adult roller derby team with at least one transgender member, sought a preliminary and permanent injunction to block the county’s law. This law was passed by the Republican-controlled Nassau County Legislature in June, following a 12-5 party-line vote. It came after an earlier executive order by Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman, imposing a similar ban, was struck down by State Supreme Court Justice Francis Ricigliano in May 2024 for exceeding Blakeman's authority.

In the initial ruling against the NYCLU's injunction request, State Supreme Court Justice Bruce Cozzens in Nassau County determined that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the ban discriminated against athletes based on gender identity. Justice Cozzens also stated there was no evidence of a likelihood of "irreparable injury" to the roller derby team if the injunction was not granted. He further asserted that the county "has a mandate" to use recreational facilities for the majority of citizens, emphasizing that elected officials pass laws in accordance with public needs. "The goal of the local law is to provide a safe environment for individuals who are born female to play," Cozzens wrote, citing a "substantial" power differential between individuals born male and those born female as a potential danger and liability risk to the municipality.

Nassau County officials have consistently defended the law, arguing it does not discriminate based on sexual identity but rather prohibits "biological men from participating in physical activities because of safety, fairness and equity reasons." County Executive Bruce Blakeman expressed gratification, stating, "We're very happy that both courts have agreed with us and as we've said all along, it's just common sense. Biological males should not play in female sports. They have a competitive advantage. It's unfair, and it's also unsafe." He claimed Nassau was the "first in America to do it" and set a precedent for the nation.

Despite the initial judicial support, the NYCLU and the Long Island Roller Rebels vowed to continue their challenge. Curly Fry, president of the Roller Rebels, condemned the ban, calling it "cruel" and "dangerous" amid rising anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment. "This harmful legislation sends the message that trans people don’t belong in Nassau County. Trans people belong everywhere including in sports," Fry stated, expressing hope that New York's courts would ultimately deem the ban "transphobic and unjust."

The case then moved to the state Supreme Court’s Appellate Division in Brooklyn, where an appeals court hearing on Thursday saw judges expressing considerable skepticism about the law. Associate Justice Paul Wooten notably called the law "a slam dunk violation" of the state's Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA) of 2019, which explicitly added gender identity or expression as a protected category under the state’s Human Rights Law. Associate Justice Betsy Barros voiced concerns that the law might compel individuals to provide intimate personal information to participate and remarked, "You should be able to live your life, you should play with who you want to play with."

During the appellate hearing, NYCLU attorney Gabriella Larios, representing the Roller Rebels, argued forcefully that the law violates state human rights and civil rights statutes, treating transgender athletes as "less than full citizens." She contended that it "shreds transgender women’s dignity" and "marks them with a scarlet T." Larios explained that the law forces organizations like the Roller Rebels to use private facilities that don’t meet their needs and hinders their ability to attract new members. She also highlighted that the Roller Rebels' rules explicitly welcome transgender women, and barring them would lead to the organization's expulsion by its governing body, the Women’s Flat Track Roller Derby Association, which has robust safety standards already in place.

Nassau Deputy Attorney John Carnevale reiterated the county's position, asserting the law is not discriminatory and no permits had been denied, nor had athletes been asked for personal information. He claimed the law promotes women's sports, ensures transparency, and mitigates county liability in case a transgender athlete injures a female competitor. Carnevale suggested that transgender women could use county facilities by marking the "coed" box on applications for facility use. However, Associate Justice Lawrence L. Love questioned this, asking if the county has weight or size restrictions for safety, or if the law is "solely a biological birth issue." Larios vehemently rejected the "coed box" suggestion, arguing it denies equal access: "State law doesn’t just give people access to facilities. It gives them equal access, and Nassau County is denying equal access to transgender women and girls."

Justice Barros also pressed Carnevale on whether lawmakers had received direct concerns from women or girls about competing against transgender women, or if any evidence supporting the law was presented to the legislature. Carnevale responded vaguely by saying, "There was public comment," without further elaboration, suggesting a lack of direct empirical evidence. The appeals court has reserved its ruling for a future date, leaving the future of Nassau County’s ban on transgender athletes in a state of uncertainty as the legal challenge continues to unfold.