BE. After being banned from competing and forced to return her medal, Imane Khelif announced that she will sue the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in the international sports court for “discrimination on the basis of gender and damage to reputation”

In a defiant move that escalates one of the most contentious chapters in Olympic history, Algerian boxer Imane Khelif announced today that she will sue the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) for “gender discrimination and defamation of character.”

The legal bombshell comes just weeks after the IOC and World Boxing jointly banned Khelif from the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics and ordered her to return the gold medal she won in the women’s 66kg category at the 2024 Paris Games. Khelif, who has maintained throughout the saga that she is a woman born and raised as such, framed the lawsuit as a stand against “unjust persecution” that has tarnished her legacy and mental health.

Speaking from Algiers in an emotional press conference flanked by her legal team and representatives from the Algerian Olympic Committee, Khelif declared, “They stripped me of my medal, my dreams, and my dignity. But they cannot strip me of the truth. I am a woman, a fighter, and I will fight this in the courts just as I fought in the ring.

The IOC’s actions are not about fairness—they are discrimination, pure and simple.” Her voice cracking with resolve, she added that the ordeal has left her “broken but unbreakable,” vowing to donate any potential settlement to women’s sports programs in Algeria

The announcement follows a whirlwind of events that began with Khelif’s triumphant Paris victory last summer. Her bout against Italy’s Angela Carini, which ended after just 46 seconds with Carini forfeiting amid tears and visible injuries, ignited global fury.

Critics, including author J.K. Rowling and swimmer Riley Gaines, accused the IOC of endangering female athletes by allowing what they claimed was a biological male to compete in women’s boxing. The firestorm intensified when leaked medical reports from the International Boxing Association (IBA)—which had disqualified Khelif from the 2023 World Championships for failing gender eligibility tests—revealed a 46,XY karyotype, internal testes, and male-range testosterone levels.

Despite the IBA’s warnings, the IOC cleared Khelif under its 2021 framework emphasizing “inclusion and non-discrimination,” prioritizing passport gender over genetic testing. But post-Paris backlash, including lawsuits from affected athletes and congressional inquiries in the U.S., forced a policy U-turn.

In September 2025, World Boxing—now the IOC-recognized governing body after the IBA’s ousting—implemented mandatory PCR testing for the SRY gene, barring athletes with male biology from women’s events. Khelif’s tests confirmed the IBA’s earlier findings, leading to the medal forfeiture order and a lifetime ban from female categories. The gold is set to be re-awarded to China’s Yang Liu, who finished second.

Khelif’s lawsuit, filed preliminarily with CAS in Lausanne, Switzerland, seeks not only reinstatement for 2028 but also damages exceeding $10 million for emotional distress, lost endorsements, and reputational harm.

Her attorneys argue that the IOC’s initial clearance followed by reversal constitutes “arbitrary discrimination,” violating the Olympic Charter’s principles of equality. “The IOC played both sides—welcoming her when it suited their narrative, then discarding her under pressure,” said lead counsel Fatima Zahra Benali. “This isn’t science; it’s scapegoating a woman from the Global South to appease Western conservatives.”

The case draws parallels to Khelif’s ongoing legal battles. In November 2024, she sued French magazine Le Correspondant for publishing unverified medical leaks, a complaint the IOC supported as “cyber harassment.”

By February 2025, amid the IBA’s own lawsuits against the IOC for allowing her to compete—citing safety risks and even invoking a U.S. executive order on transgender athletes—Khelif fired back with defamation claims against the IBA. “False and offensive accusations,” she called them then, mirroring her rhetoric today. French authorities are investigating her cyberbullying suit naming high-profile figures like Elon Musk and Piers Morgan for online vitriol.

At its core, the dispute hinges on Differences of Sex Development (DSD), a condition affecting about 1 in 20,000 births where chromosomal or anatomical variations occur. Khelif, like Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting (who faces a similar medal review), was assigned female at birth and raised in Algeria’s conservative society, where transgender identity is criminalized.

Yet genetic evidence shows XY chromosomes and functional testes producing testosterone at levels 10 times the female average—granting, per studies in the Journal of Medical Genetics, a 30-50% edge in strength and power.

Dr. Emma Hilton, a sports biologist advocating for sex-based categories, praised the ban: “This isn’t discrimination; it’s biology. Women’s sports exist to ensure fair play, not to accommodate rare variances that mimic male advantages.” Conversely, Dr. Katrina Karkazis, a bioethicist at Columbia University, calls the testing “invasive and discriminatory,” arguing it pathologizes natural diversity. “Imane is a woman by every social and legal metric. Punishing her reinforces colonial attitudes toward non-Western bodies.”

Key Elements of Khelif’s Lawsuit	Claims	Potential Outcomes
Gender Discrimination	IOC reversal violates equality principles	Reinstatement to women’s events
Defamation of Character	Public statements implying fraud	$10M+ damages; public apology
Emotional Distress	Impact from harassment and ban	Compensation for therapy/endorsements
Procedural Unfairness	No due process in testing	Medal restoration pending appeal

The news has polarized the sports world anew. Supporters like Martina Navratilova tweeted, “Good—let the courts affirm what science already knows. Fairness for women isn’t optional.” Riley Gaines, whose advocacy group Save Women’s Sports funded anti-Khelif campaigns, added, “She’s suing for the right to punch women? This is peak entitlement.”

LGBTQ+ organizations, including GLAAD, rallied behind Khelif: “This is transphobia by proxy. The IOC must drop the ban or face global boycott calls.” Algeria’s government, already threatening diplomatic repercussions, pledged full support, with President Tebboune labeling it “neo-colonialism in sports.”

The IOC responded cautiously: “We respect Imane’s right to appeal but stand by our commitment to safe, fair competition. The decision was evidence-based.” World Boxing’s Boris van der Vorst, who apologized to Algeria for privacy breaches in earlier tests, reiterated, “Biology protects the ring.”

Khelif’s suit could redefine Olympic eligibility. CAS rulings have historically favored inclusion—recall Caster Semenya’s 2019 loss on hyperandrogenism rules—but recent shifts, like World Athletics’ 2023 chromosome bans, signal a conservative turn. With 2028 qualifiers starting soon, a prolonged case might delay boxing’s Olympic status altogether.

For Khelif, now 27, time is ticking. “I’ve faced poverty, doubt, and now this,” she said. “But every punch taught me resilience. I’ll win this fight too.” Whether in the ring or courtroom, her story spotlights the clash between identity, science, and equity—a battle far from over.

As the world watches, one truth emerges: In the quest for fairness, no one emerges unscathed.

According to information and data collected, more and more Americans say that transgender athletes should only play for teams that match their birth gender.

As of November 2025, public opinion in the United States continues to show strong support for requiring transgender athletes to compete on sports teams that match their sex assigned at birth rather than their gender identity. Recent polls from Gallup and Pew Research Center indicate that this view has remained stable or slightly strengthened since 2023, with roughly two-thirds to 69% of Americans favoring birth-sex-based teams.

This represents a notable increase from earlier surveys, reflecting growing concerns over fairness in women’s sports.

The trend began accelerating around 2021, when Gallup first tracked the issue in detail. At that time, 62% of Americans believed transgender athletes should only play on teams matching their birth gender, while 34% supported competition based on gender identity.

By 2023, opposition to gender-identity-based participation rose to 69%, and Gallup’s May 2025 Values and Beliefs poll confirmed this figure held steady at 69%. Support for allowing transgender athletes to play on teams aligning with their current gender identity has fallen to just 24-26% in recent measurements.

Pew Research Center’s February 2025 survey of over 5,000 adults painted a similar picture, with 66% favoring laws requiring transgender athletes to compete on teams matching their sex assigned at birth—an 8-point increase from prior years.

This shift has occurred amid heightened political debate and executive actions under President Donald Trump, who in early 2025 signed orders barring transgender women from women’s sports and restricting related policies.

Partisan divides remain stark but have narrowed slightly among Democrats. In Gallup’s 2025 data, 90% of Republicans insist on birth-sex teams, compared to 72% of independents and only 41% of Democrats.

However, even among Democrats, support for transgender athletes playing on gender-identity-matching teams has dropped to 45%, with 14% unsure. This marks a 10-point decline since 2021 for both Democrats and independents.

Generational differences persist, with younger Americans (18-29) more supportive of inclusive policies at around 41% favoring gender-identity teams, though this is still a minority view.

Overall, familiarity with transgender individuals correlates with slightly more accepting attitudes, but even among those who know a transgender person, support for birth-sex restrictions has grown.

Other 2025 polls reinforce this consensus. A New York Times/Ipsos survey in January found 79% of Americans opposing transgender women (assigned male at birth) competing in women’s sports, including 67% of Democrats.

An NBC News Stay Tuned Poll in April reported 75% opposition, with Gen Z showing the least resistance but still majorities against inclusion in women’s categories.

The primary driver cited in these surveys is competitive fairness, particularly in women’s sports where biological differences in strength, speed, and endurance can provide advantages.

Gallup notes that Americans increasingly view the issue through a lens of equity for female athletes rather than solely civil rights. High-profile cases, such as injuries to cisgender women or displaced scholarships, have fueled this perspective.

State-level actions reflect public sentiment: At least 25 states now ban transgender women from women’s sports, up from 20 in 2023. Federal policies under Trump, including NCAA rule changes limiting women’s sports to those assigned female at birth, align with these views.

Yet, majorities oppose outright bans on transgender participation altogether, favoring separate categories or birth-sex alignment instead.

Broader transgender policies show mixed support. While 66% in Gallup’s poll want birth sex on official IDs, majorities protect transgender people from discrimination in housing and employment.

Pew found increased backing for restrictions on youth gender-affirming care (56%) and bathroom policies (49%), but Americans remain divided on moral acceptability of gender transition.

Compared to the 2023 U.S. News article highlighting a rise to 69%, the latest data shows stability at that high level rather than further escalation.

This plateau suggests the issue has solidified as a majority consensus, influenced by media coverage, athletic governing body decisions, and political framing during the 2024 election cycle.

Critics of restrictive policies argue they marginalize a small transgender population (about 0.9-1% of adults) and that hormone therapy mitigates advantages.

Advocates for inclusion point to mental health benefits of sports participation. However, polls indicate these arguments have not swayed the broader public, with fairness in female categories dominating discourse.

International bodies like World Athletics and FINA maintain strict testosterone limits or birth-sex rules for elite women’s events, mirroring U.S. opinion.

As LGBTQ+ identification rises to 9.3% in 2024 Gallup data, future shifts may depend on generational replacement, though current young adults still lean toward restrictions in sports.

In summary, as of late 2025, approximately 66-79% of Americans—depending on poll wording—support requiring transgender athletes to compete based on birth sex, a view that has grown and stabilized over the past four years.

This reflects deep concerns about equity in athletics, transcending party lines more than other transgender issues, and has driven widespread policy changes at state and federal levels.