We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

On the local front, I have sought to draw attention to the case of JaycCee Cooper v. USA Powerlifting in several posts accessible here. Filed in Ramsey County District Court and assigned to Judge Patrick Diamond, the case raises the question whether USAP’s separation of men from women in USAP’s Minnesota competitions must yield to Cooper’s self-identification as a woman.

Although a biological male, Cooper seeks to compete with the ladies. Cooper alleges that USAP’s refusal to yield to his self-identification as a woman violates the Minnesota Human Rights Act and Judge Diamond agreed.

Physical strength lies at the core of weightlifting. Men are stronger than women. Treating men as women destroys the competition. It is absurd.

Ramsey County District Judge Patrick Diamond disagreed. Judge Diamond — he is no gem. He held that USA Powerlifting mistreated Cooper under the terms of the Minnesota Human Rights Act. All that remained to be determined were damages. He granted injunctive relief of his own accord.

USA Powerlifting filed an interlocutory appeal of Judge Diamond’s injunction and determination of liability under the MHRA. Today the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed Judge Diamond, holding that “there are genuine issues of material fact with respect to Cooper’s claims of discrimination based on sexual orientation (which is defined by statute to include transgender status)” and “that there are genuine issues of material fact with respect to USAPL’s statutory legitimate-business-purpose defense to Cooper’s claims of discrimination in business.”

This is a 2-1 decision. Judge Jennifer Frisch concurred in part and dissented in part from the panel decision by Judge Matthew Johnson. Judge Frisch agrees with Cooper on the merits of his claims. I think she is out to lunch in a world of her own.

The panel opinions are posted here. I can only say I hope the Minnesota Supreme Court lets the Court of Appeals decision stand.

Ansis Viksnins represents USA Powerlifting. He is an old acquaintance who has patiently answered my questions about this unreal case along the way. I asked him for a statement on the Court of Appeals decision today. Ansis responded:

We are pleased that the appellate court corrected the serious mistakes made in the lower court and has provided us an opportunity to tell our side of the story to a Ramsey County jury. USA Powerlifting did not exclude JayCee Cooper from the women’s category because of her gender identity. USA Powerlifting excluded her from competing in the women’s division because of her physiology: she was born biologically male and USAPL does not allow athletes who went through male puberty to compete in the women’s division.

Maintaining separate categories based on sex, age, and weight is necessary so that similarly situated athletes are competing in appropriate categories and have fair opportunities of success. Scientific studies show that athletes who have gone through male puberty enjoy a large strength advantage over athletes who go through puberty as a female. The scientific studies also show that suppressing testosterone only reduces the strength advantage by a very minimal amount. Because powerlifting is a strength sport, the strength differences between competitors who were born male and those who were born female are significant. Today’s decision is a victory for fairness in sports.

Even before the Star Tribune got around to reporting Judge Diamond’s decision last year, it published Minnesota Lynx president Cheryl Reeve’s op-ed column celebrating it. Reeve omitted any discussion of the possible participation of male trans athletes in the WNBA.

It wouldn’t take many JayCee Coopers to render the WNBA a farce. Reeve could have made a contribution if she had taken up that possibility. As it is, she mostly proved that the welcome mat is out in the Star Tribune’s Opinion Exchange (as they call it) to columns lacking in either evidence or argument. Under certain circumstances, the correct attitude will suffice. In this case it serves to let us know where Cheryl Reeve and the Lynx stand on the issue. I would like to say that Reeve is hardest hit by the Court of Appeals decision today if only I could be sure it was the last word on the issue under Minnesota law.