Oct 27 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court panel in Richmond, Virginia, heard arguments on Friday surrounding a controversial West Virginia state law seeking to ban transgender girls from participating in girls' sports. The case centers around an eighth-grade student, Becky Pepper-Jackson, who identifies as a transgender girl and wishes to continue competing in track and field alongside her female peers.

Representing Pepper-Jackson, Joshua Block of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) urged the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse a lower court ruling that upheld the state law. The 4th Circuit had previously blocked enforcement of the law against the student pending the outcome of the case.

During the oral arguments, Block emphasized that there is no legitimate basis to deny transgender individuals the right to participate in sports based on their gender identity, just as there is no justification for discrimination based on race or religion. He contended that since Pepper-Jackson has not undergone male puberty, any supposed competitive advantage is nullified.

Block further referenced a 2020 decision by the 4th Circuit that declared discrimination based on transgender status to be illegal, citing it as a precedent that supports Pepper-Jackson's case.

However, West Virginia Solicitor General Lindsay See argued that the state had presented evidence showing that transgender girls, even without male puberty, retain physical advantages in sports. See advocated for the court to defer to the state legislature's assessment of the scientific evidence.

Two members of the panel, Circuit Judges Pamela Harris and Toby Heytens, expressed skepticism towards the state's argument. Judge Harris questioned whether the court should consider the state's law in light of other legislation affecting transgender individuals, such as a ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Judge Heytens suggested that the state's position implied that cisgender girls should never have to compete against transgender girls, a notion he found problematic.

Circuit Judge G. Steven Agee seemed more receptive to the state's viewpoint, particularly questioning the relevance of a previous bathroom case in relation to sports. Agee opined that competitive athletics, unlike using a bathroom, involved substantive differences that must be considered.

It is anticipated that the panel's eventual ruling will likely serve as a "waystation" to the U.S. Supreme Court, as Judge Agee suggested. At least 22 other states have implemented similar laws aimed at governing transgender participation in sports, with one such law recently being blocked by the 9th Circuit in Idaho.

The Biden administration's Department of Education proposed a rule change in April to prohibit outright bans on transgender athletes participating in sports consistent with their gender identities, while still allowing flexibility for exceptions at the highest levels of competition.

The case, known as B.P.J. v. West Virginia Secondary School Activities Commission, holds significant implications for transgender inclusion in school sports across the United States. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is expected to issue a decision in the coming weeks.

For plaintiff Becky Pepper-Jackson, she hopes that the court's ruling will pave the way for equal opportunities for transgender athletes in West Virginia and beyond.