Minnesota House declines to suspend rules on bill restricting transgender athletes from girls sports after heated debate

The Minnesota House on March 26 declined to suspend its rules to bring House File 26-85, a measure the bill uthor and supporters described as intended to limit participation in girls sports to those designated female at birth.

Representative Niska, who moved the suspension, said delaying action left Minnesota out of step with recent federal and international developments, arguing the state could risk "more than $3 billion" in federal funding and that the Department of Justice had already sued state education entities over compliance with federal sex-discrimination law. "We need to fix Minnesota law now," Niska said.

Representative Knudsen, identified as the author of the bill, framed the measure as a defense of Title IX and female athletes, saying, "Protecting girls is not hate." Knudsen and other supporters repeatedly cited physiological differences and safety concerns in contact sports as central rationales for separate female categories.

Opponents said the bill would discriminate against transgender and gender-diverse students and warned of the harms of exclusion and stigmatization. "This bill discriminates against our trans students," Representative Jordan said, urging members to vote no and calling the measure "hateful and bigoted." Several members noted that Minnesota lready includes gender identity in the Minnesota Human Rights Act.

Debate included repeated factual claims from both sides: proponents cited an International Olympic Committee policy and a federal lawsuit as evidence of urgency; opponents pointed to Minnesota—ase law and longstanding state protections for gender identity. Questions about enforcement and the bill—ramework lso surfaced, including concerns about how schools would verify sex for participation, and whether nonbinary and intersex students were addressed.

After a call of the House and a roll-call vote on the motion to suspend the rules, the clerk announced the tally and said, "They—eing 67 eyes and 66 nays. The motion does not prevail." Members subsequently voted on motions to take House File 12 and House File 12-33 from the table; both motions likewise failed by the same announced tally.

The session concluded with brief announcements and the House adjourned until April 9, 2026.

Why it matters: supporters argued the measure would protect fairness and preserve federal funding; opponents countered it would create new discrimination and implementation problems for schools, and place transgender students at risk of exclusion. The debate highlights the wider national controversy over sports participation and the tension between state policies, federal enforcement, and international sports governing bodies.

What—omes next: because the suspension of rules failed and the motions to take related bills from the table did not prevail, House File 26-85 did not advance to immediate final passage; proponents said they may pursue other procedural paths, and opponents said the House should focus on other legislative priorities.