James Talarico Reverses His Stance on Trans Athletes in Girls Sports, Sparking Criticism from LGBTQ+ Texans & Democratic Voters

Texas Democratic U.S. Senate nominee James Talarico’s declaration that he would oppose transgender girls in school sports when he believes participation threatens “safety or fairness” represents a marked shift from his legislative record, and revives a political debate whose consequences are borne by transgender young people, not candidates or campaigns.

Democratic U.S. Senate nominee James Talarico said he would oppose transgender student-athletes competing in girls’ sports “if it endangers safety or fairness,” signaling a departure from his earlier opposition to Texas Republican legislation restricting transgender youth from playing on teams that match their gender identity.

“Every sport has to be safe and fair,” Talarico said in a Fox News interview. “As a former public school teacher, I care a lot about our student athletes; I care a lot about our students. And so I will oppose trans athletes playing in girls’ sports if it risks safety or fairness.”

For Talarico, an Austin Democrat trying to break a statewide losing streak that has followed Texas Democrats since 1994, the language appears calibrated for a difficult political landscape. Republicans have made transgender participation in sports a defining front in their broader culture-war campaign, and Attorney General Ken Paxton, Talarico’s Republican opponent in the Senate race, has repeatedly used the issue to cast him as out of step with Texas voters.

Still, Talarico’s shift is notable because it contrasts with his record in the Texas House, where he voted against Republican-backed bills that barred transgender students from participating on athletic teams that align with their gender identity. During the 2021 debate, Talarico said the proposals amounted to lawmakers trying to “police people’s private parts.” He also argued that the rhetoric used to justify transgender sports bans echoed arguments historically deployed to limit the participation of Black athletes.

“Some things are more important than perfectly fair competition in sports,” Talarico said in 2021.

In the Fox News interview, Talarico said his objection to the Texas bills was that they were “overly broad,” rather than that every restriction on transgender athletes was inherently wrong. He said he supported amendments that would have delegated decisions to local school officials, limited restrictions to individual sports instead of team sports, and narrowed which schools would be affected.

“I supported amendments that would have given the power to make these decisions to local communities,  like conservatives used to believe,” Talarico said. “I think that the people closest to these problems are best equipped to make decisions for themselves, not politicians in Austin, not politicians in Washington.”

Talarico’s campaign has used similar language in recent months. Campaign spokesperson JT Ennis said in August that Talarico opposed transgender athletes playing in girls’ sports when participation “jeopardizes safety or fairness,” while also maintaining that he opposed discrimination and the use of transgender youth as political targets. A report on Talarico’s reversal characterized his Fox News appearance as the first time he had personally stated that position so explicitly.

The Senate candidate also used the interview to walk back a past statement that there are six sexes. Talarico said he had “missed the mark” in his earlier comments.

“There are not six sexes, there are two,” Talarico said.

Paxton quickly denounced Talarico’s comments as an election-year reversal that did not match his legislative record.

“James Talarico voted against TWO bills that would have prevented men from playing in women’s sports,” Paxton wrote on X. “He also called it a ‘far-right conspiracy theory.’ This is just the latest episode in James Talarico’s long saga of lies and flip-flops.”

Brad Pritchett, CEO of Equality Texas, said Talarico’s comments were a disappointment given his previous support for inclusive school environments and LGBTQ+ Texans.

“When did people of moral standing decide to use Texas children as a political football?” Pritchett said. “Fairness in school sports must include trans kids. Trans kids deserve the opportunity to play sports as much as their peers.”

The question of athletic eligibility is not imaginary, and different sports, age groups, and levels of competition can raise different considerations. However, a blanket political position that casts transgender girls as an inherent risk to safety or fairness is troubling because it transforms a small group of students into a national campaign symbol while offering little clarity about what standard will govern their exclusion.

The scale of the debate is often vastly larger than the number of athletes involved. NCAA President Charlie Baker told Congress in December 2024 that he knew of fewer than 10 transgender student-athletes among the NCAA’s approximately 510,000 athletes. That fact does not settle every discussion about eligibility rules. It does, however, underscore how frequently politicians, media figures and campaign strategists use an extraordinarily small number of young people and college athletes to animate sweeping claims about schools, women’s sports and public safety. GLAAD’s fact sheet for reporters on transgender participation in sports cites Baker’s testimony and places the number in the context of the NCAA’s overall athlete population.

The harm of that framing becomes clearer when measured against the conditions many transgender students already face. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2023 Youth Risk Behavior Survey found that 40.1% of transgender high school students reported being bullied at school. The federal survey also found that 25.3% had missed school during the prior 30 days because they felt unsafe, 64.9% reported poor mental health, and 25.9% reported attempting suicide during the previous year.

Those findings do not establish that sports restrictions alone cause mental-health crises or suicide attempts. They do establish that transgender students are living through a markedly unsafe and precarious school experience, one in which public debate about their bodies and belonging cannot be separated from the conditions they encounter in classrooms, hallways and locker rooms. The CDC report specifically identifies school connectedness, supportive environments, and inclusive practices as important protections for students facing violence, instability, and mental-health distress. Read the CDC’s full findings here.

A politics of restriction also risks naming inclusion itself as the problem while ignoring discrimination and institutional abandonment. When elected officials use imprecise language about safety and fairness without articulating evidence-based, individualized standards, the practical result can be policies that invite schools to police children’s gender expression, demand invasive personal documentation or isolate students from the peers and activities that help them feel connected.

Talarico’s current formulation also appears to retreat from the more localized, individualized approach he once endorsed. In the Legislature, he argued that decisions should be handled by school and athletic officials closest to the particular sport and student. His current statement does not explain who determines whether a student presents a safety or fairness concern, what evidence would be required, or how schools would prevent discriminatory enforcement. Without those safeguards, “safety” and “fairness” can become elastic political terms, broad enough to justify categorical exclusion, but too vague to protect students from arbitrary treatment.

For Black communities, the discussion carries an additional historical weight. Talarico himself previously compared the rationales behind transgender sports bans to the arguments historically used to exclude Black athletes. American sports has never been a neutral arena. Segregation barred Black athletes from leagues, facilities, and opportunities. Racist pseudoscience portrayed Black bodies as biologically different, threatening or athletically suspect. Rules about who belongs in competition have repeatedly been used to police the humanity of people already marginalized by the nation’s social order.

That history does not mean that every discussion of athletic categories is identical to racial segregation. It does mean that public officials should proceed with humility when they frame a marginalized child’s presence as an inherent competitive threat. Black Americans understand too well how quickly “fairness” can be weaponized, how easily institutions can turn bodily difference into a pretext for exclusion, and how often supposedly neutral rules land hardest on those with the least political power.

Talarico has built his political profile around Christian faith, economic populism and the moral language of loving one’s neighbor. He has argued that Republican culture-war politics distracts voters from economic inequality, corporate power and policies benefiting wealthy interests. At a campaign event last year, Talarico said, “The only minority destroying America is the billionaires,” describing culture-war fights as a smokescreen that turns neighbors against one another.

But the tension in his new position is unavoidable. A campaign cannot credibly condemn the political use of transgender people as scapegoats while adopting language that helps sustain the premise that transgender children are a public danger requiring special suspicion.

The challenge is not whether elected officials can discuss sports policy with seriousness. They can and should. The challenge is whether those discussions begin with the humanity of transgender youth, the actual evidence, the limited scale of the issue, and an acknowledgment that young people deserve safety from harassment as much as they deserve access to school life.

For transgender students, sports can be more than a scoreboard. Teams can provide friendship, mentorship, physical activity, structure, and the simple dignity of participation. A 2025 study of transgender and gender-diverse adolescents found that sports-team participation was associated with better mental-health outcomes, while bias-based bullying was associated with worse outcomes. The study does not claim athletics alone resolves the structural harms transgender youth experience, but it reinforces what young people and advocates have long said; exclusion from school life comes with consequences.

The question before Talarico, and every Democrat seeking to withstand Republican attacks on transgender rights, is whether electoral caution will come at the expense of the students politicians say they want to protect. In Texas, where transgender youth have already been made the subject of repeated legislative battles, that answer will be felt far beyond the campaign trail.