The North Star State is siding with transgenderism over female athletes. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the USA Powerlifting organization unlawfully discriminated against a biological male who identifies as transgender when barring him from competing in a women’s division in 2018.

The transgender identifying male, who goes by the name JayCee Cooper, filed a lawsuit against the organization under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), which bars discrimination on the basis of protected categories, including transgender identification. “At the time relevant to this lawsuit, the MHRA did so under its prohibitions on discrimination on the basis of ‘sexual orientation,’ which the MHRA defined as including ‘having or being perceived as having a self-image or identity not traditionally associated with one’s biological maleness or femaleness,’” the court noted. Since then, the legislation has been amended to explicitly include transgender identity as its own separate protected category.

Cooper, who has identified as transgender since the age of 26, signed up to compete in USA Powerlifting competitions in 2018, seeking admission in the women’s open superheavyweight division. USA Powerlifting, however, had developed a new policy barring transgender-identifying biological males from competing in female divisions. “Male-to-female transgenders are not allowed to compete as females in our static strength sport as it is a direct competitive advantage,” the organization informed Cooper.

A Minnesota district court originally determined that USA Powerlifting did discriminate against Cooper, but that decision was reversed by an appellate court. “We affirm in part and reverse in part, concluding that the district court went too far in the scope of its grant of partial summary judgment to Cooper on the claim for discrimination in business, while also concluding that the court of appeals went too far in the scope of its reversal,” the state’s supreme court wrote in its unanimous decision. “USA Powerlifting’s policy expressly prohibiting transgender women from competing in the women’s division of a powerlifting competition is facially discriminatory and constitutes direct evidence of discrimination based on sexual orientation under the MHRA’s prohibition against discrimination in business and places of public accommodation.”

“Because USA Powerlifting’s facially discriminatory policy provides direct evidence of discriminatory motive, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether Cooper’s transgender status actually motivated USA Powerlifting’s decision to prohibit Cooper from competing. We therefore reverse the part of the court of appeals’ decision on this issue,” the court continued. “We agree with Cooper that USA Powerlifting’s policy is discriminatory on its face; there is therefore no genuine dispute that USA Powerlifting discriminated against Cooper because of her transgender status.”

Chief Justice Natalie Hudson, who wrote the court’s opinion, and Justices Gordon Moore, Karl Procaccini, and Sarah Hennesy were all appointed by Governor Tim Walz (D), while Justices Anne McKeig and Paul Thissen were appointed by then-Governor Mark Dayton (D). Justice Theodora Gaïtas was also appointed by Walz but did not partake in the court’s deliberations or decision.

The Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to decide whether or not federal protections exist for women’s sports. The nation’s highest court will review a pair of cases — Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. BPJ — in its current term, both dealing with states attempting to bar transgender-identifying biological males from competing in women’s sports.

A biological male going by the name Lindsay Hecox recently sought to withdraw his challenge to Idaho’s state law protecting women’s sports, but the Supreme Court issued an unsigned order Wednesday denying the request. “Respondent’s request that the Court dismiss the case as moot is deferred pending oral argument,” the court wrote, with no dissents noted. Oral arguments have not yet been scheduled but authorities for both Idaho and West Virginia have urged the Supreme Court to consider both cases together.

Hecox had previously challenged Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act after being prohibited from trying out for the Boise State University women’s track and cross country teams. Originally, Hecox argued that the law violated Title IX protections, which President Donald Trump has since revised to restore protections for girls and women. A federal district court blocked the law from going into effect, a decision upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.