US Federal Senate Bill SB1988

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/9/25
• Refer: 6/9/25

Caption

A bill to prohibit the participation of males in athletic programs or activities at the military service academies that are designated for women or girls.

Summary

SB 1988 would direct the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the U.S. Military Academy, Naval Academy, and Air Force Academy do not allow males to participate in athletic programs or activities that are designated for women or girls. The bill is aimed at sex-segregated athletics at the military service academies and applies to programs or activities tied to athletic team participation. The bill also includes a rule of construction clarifying that males may still train or practice with women’s or girls’ teams so long as no female loses a roster spot, participation opportunity, scholarship, admission, or any other benefit associated with the athletic program. It defines “sex” as a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth, and defines covered athletic programs and activities broadly to include programs or activities provided conditional upon participation with an athletic team.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would create a federal requirement governing athletics at the three U.S. military service academies and would limit academy discretion in assigning participants to women’s or girls’ sports programs. It would not broadly regulate all military athletics, but it would affect academy sports policies, team eligibility rules, and related benefits such as roster spots and scholarships tied to participation.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no direct evidence of debate or bipartisan support in the provided materials. Based on the bill text and sponsor, the measure appears to reflect a strong interest in restricting participation in women’s and girls’ athletic programs based on sex as defined at birth. The absence of recorded votes or hearing discussion means the overall sentiment in the legislative process cannot be fully assessed from the available context.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the bill’s categorical exclusion of males from women’s or girls’ athletic programs at the service academies, which raises questions about sex-based eligibility, fairness in competition, and how the policy would apply in practice. Supporters would likely view the measure as protecting women’s sports and preserving opportunities for female cadets, while opponents may argue it is discriminatory, overly rigid, or inconsistent with broader inclusion policies. The rule allowing practice or training together, so long as no female loses a benefit, suggests the bill tries to narrow its reach, but the definition of sex and the scope of covered activities could still be disputed.