California high school and college volleyball disputes escalate into lawsuits as athletes, parents fault state policy

Girls and parents in Southern California have filed a lawsuit and lodged Title IX complaints alleging that current state policies allowing transgender athletes to participate on girls' teams have infringed on privacy, religious rights and competitive fairness, according to court filings and interviews.

In Riverside County, Jurupa Valley High School senior Hadeel Hazameh and teammates Alyssa and Madison McPherson joined a lawsuit against the Jurupa Unified School District, the California Interscholastic Federation and the California Department of Education, saying they were forced to share locker rooms and compete directly against a biological male teammate. Hazameh, a practicing Muslim, told reporters she left the team in her final season and that her religious practice made the situation untenable. "I shouldn't have had to be scared to change in the women's locker room," she said in an interview published by Fox News Digital.

Plaintiffs and parents said they repeatedly raised concerns with school administrators and were told the matter was governed by state law and therefore beyond district authority. Maribel Munoz, mother of plaintiff Madison McPherson, said complaints to athletic directors, vice principals, the principal and the superintendent were ignored or deferred as "above their pay grade." The Jurupa Unified School District said in a statement that school districts follow state law and urged critics to direct advocacy to state and federal officials who make education policy.

The dispute has affected schedules: four schools informed Jurupa Valley they would forfeit matches this season amid the controversy, the plaintiffs and local parents said. At least one other Southern California institution, Santa Rosa Junior College, faced a Title IX complaint in early September after players alleged a transgender teammate delivered spikes that injured female players, including an alleged concussion. The college said it complies with California Community College Athletic Association regulations and did not publicly respond to the specific injury allegations.

The complaints in high school and junior college athletics come as California faces separate federal scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice sued the state in July over its policy on transgender participation in girls' sports. The U.S. Department of Education has opened a Title IX investigation into San Jose State University after allegations that a biological male player competed on the women's team and that a teammate was harmed, according to court filings and media reports.

At San Jose State, former player Blaire Fleming — identified in court filings as a biological male who played three seasons with the team — has been at the center of a lawsuit filed by former co-captain Brooke Slusser. Slusser alleges the university concealed Fleming's birth sex from teammates and that Fleming conspired with an opponent to injure her; Fleming and university officials have disputed some of those claims. The Education Department told reporters in July that the SJSU investigation "will continue."

The broader legal and political context in California dates to a 2013 state law signed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown that permits student participation consistent with gender identity. Lawmakers in April blocked two bills that would have reversed the current standard; the bills failed on party-line votes, with Democrats opposing the measures. During that session, Assembly member Rick Chavez Zbur drew criticism for likening the proposed bills to historical persecution, a comparison that members of both parties said prompted strong reactions from lawmakers and observers.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has publicly acknowledged concerns about fairness in girls' sports, has declined to direct state agencies to change existing practice and has said the legislature would need to pass a law for the policy to change. Newsom's office provided a statement saying the California Interscholastic Federation and the Department of Education are separate entities that follow existing state law and that any change would require legislative action. In public interviews this year, Newsom said he has been "amazingly frustrated" by the issue and acknowledged conversations with parents who told him they viewed the policy as unfair. He also said he did not focus on the legislative committee vote in early April because he was engaged with wildfire recovery efforts.

Attorneys and parents pressing the lawsuits argue that state guidance and athletic-governing-body policies prioritize gender identity and, in doing so, compromise the intent of Title IX protections for biological female athletes. Opponents counter that existing law and policies aim to balance inclusion and nondiscrimination. The California Department of Education declined to comment on pending litigation.

The disputes have reverberated beyond the courts and locker rooms. Former San Jose State player Slusser, who left California after the allegations involving Fleming, has encouraged other athletes to assert their religious beliefs and safety concerns. Parents and players in Jurupa Valley and at Santa Rosa said the SJSU case and other high-profile incidents, including a 2022 North Carolina high school case in which a player suffered serious head injuries after a spike from a transgender opponent, informed their decisions to file complaints and pursue litigation.

Legal proceedings and federal inquiries are ongoing. The CIF did not respond to requests for comment on operational decisions; the state and local school districts said they are following current law and awaiting guidance from courts and legislators. Plaintiffs said they hope litigation will prompt policy changes at the district, state and legislative levels. Some athletes and parents have also suggested the issue could influence voters in upcoming statewide elections.

As the cases proceed, school officials, state agencies and federal regulators will determine whether current policies balance nondiscrimination commitments with protections for privacy, safety and competitive fairness — questions that plaintiffs, defendants and lawmakers have framed differently in court filings and public statements. Coverage of the disputes is likely to follow both courtroom developments and any legislative or regulatory action that could alter eligibility rules for school sports.