EWTN News portal (June 30, 2026) reports the United States Supreme Court ruled six to three that states may prohibit men from competing in women’s athletic leagues, affirming that Title IX permits sex-separated teams defined by biological sex. The decision arose from consolidated cases in Idaho and West Virginia where males identifying as female challenged state bans. Three female justices — Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson — filed partial concurrences, with Sotomayor lamenting the “hardship” inflicted on “athletes who identify as the opposite sex” and Jackson asserting that Title IX’s definition of “sex” includes “gender identity.” The International Olympic Committee and NCAA have recently adopted similar restrictions, the latter only under threat of federal funding cuts by President Trump. The article, penned by EWTN senior editor Daniel Payne, presents this juridical minimalism as a victory. **This ruling, hailed by the conciliar sect’s media apparatus, is in reality a capitulation to the naturalistic framework that birthed gender ideology, legitimizing the very legal positivism that dethrones Christ the King from civil society.**
The Naturalistic Reduction of Sexual Reality to Legal Fiction
The Supreme Court’s opinion, as summarized by the EWTN article, grounds its holding in “safety and competitive fairness” — “important interests” for equal protection concerns — and declares sex-separated teams “substantially related” to furthering those interests. Nowhere does the Court appeal to the lex naturalis, the immutable order inscribed by the Creator in the very bodies of men and women (Genesis 1:27: “male and female He created them”). Instead, sexual difference is reduced to a “biological sex” category serviceable for administrative convenience, a mere positivistic datum that the legislature may recognize or ignore at will. This is the very essence of the error condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (1864), proposition 56: “Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine sanction, and it is not at all necessary that human laws should be made conformable to the laws of nature and receive their power of binding from God.” The Court’s reasoning severs civil law from the eternal law, making the state the arbiter of what “sex” means — a usurpation of the divine prerogative.
The Conciliar Sect’s Complicity in the Gender Ideology Agenda
EWTN News, the flagship media organ of the conciliar sect, reports this decision without a whisper of supernatural critique. Daniel Payne’s article frames the ruling as a blow to “LGBT activists” and a vindication of “biological sex,” yet it never once invokes the Social Reign of Christ the King, the only bulwark against the dissolution of the family and the corruption of youth. Pope Pius XI, in Quas Primas (1925), thundered: “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed, because the main reason why some have the right to command and others have the duty to obey was removed.” The conciliar sect’s silence on this principle is not accidental; it is the bitter fruit of Dignitatis Humanae and the false ecumenism of Vatican II, which surrendered the Church’s divine mandate to teach nations (Matthew 28:19-20) in exchange for a seat at the table of secular liberalism. By celebrating a purely naturalistic legal victory, EWTN confirms its role as a paramasonic structure managing the controlled opposition, ensuring that resistance to gender ideology never rises above the level of “fairness” and “safety” — categories wholly compatible with the Masonic project of a civitas without God.
The Supreme Court’s Subordination of Divine Law to Positive Law
The partial concurrences of Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson lay bare the metaphysical bankruptcy of the entire juridical edifice. Sotomayor’s sympathy for the “hardship” of males pretending to be female, and Jackson’s assertion that “definitions of ‘sex’ in Title IX rules includes the concept of ‘gender identity,’” demonstrate that the dispute is not whether the law will recognize the fiction of “gender identity,” but when and how. The majority’s reliance on “biological sex” is a provisional tactical concession, not a principled stand. As the Syllabus of Errors condemns (prop. 39): “The State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits.” The Court here acts as the supreme legislator of reality itself, arrogating to itself the power to define the sexes — a power belonging solely to Deus Creator. The ruling’s foundation in Title IX, a statute of the federal Leviathan, exemplifies the error of legal positivism denounced by St. Pius X in Lamentabili Sane Exitu (1907), where the Modernist proposition that “Ecclesiastical law… does not apply to authors engaged in scientific criticism” (prop. 1) finds its civil analogue: the state’s law acknowledges no higher norm.
The Theological Bankruptcy of “Fairness” Without Reference to Natural Law
The article’s exclusive focus on “competitive fairness” and “safety” reveals a pragmatic anthropocentrism indistinguishable from the utilitarian ethics of the Enlightenment. The Catechism of the Council of Trent teaches that the lex naturalis is “the light of understanding infused in us by God, whereby we understand what must be done and what must be avoided.” To argue that men should not compete against women merely because of physical advantage is to concede that if hormone therapy or surgical mutilation could equalize performance, the objection would vanish. This is the reductio ad absurdum of a morality untethered from the telos of human sexuality: the unitive and procreative ends ordained by God (Gaudium et Spes is a conciliar document, but the doctrine is perenne; cf. Casti Connubii, Pius XI, 1930). The conciliar sect’s media, by amplifying this truncated argument, participates in the demolition of the supernatural order, training the faithful to think like secular jurists rather than as subjects of Christ the King.
The Symptomatic Silence on the Supernatural Order
The gravest accusation against the EWTN article is what it omits. Not a word on the peccatum contra naturam, not a syllable on the ultima ratio of divine judgment, not a reference to the duty of the Catholic state to repress public vice (Quas Primas: “The state must leave the same freedom to the members of Orders and Congregations… who are indeed the most valiant helpers of the Pastors of the Church and contribute most to the expansion and establishment of Christ’s Kingdom”). This silence is the signum contradictionis of the entire conciliar enterprise: a pseudo-Catholic media outlet reporting on a pseudo-victory in a Masonic court system, all within the framework of a pseudo-Church that has abandoned the regnum Christi for the civitas terrena. As Pope Pius IX warned in the allocution Quibus quantisque (1849), cited in the Syllabus (prop. 40): “The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well-being and interests of society” — so the world believes, and so the conciliar sect acts, for it no longer teaches the integral faith but a watered-down humanitarianism that the world finds palatable.
Conclusion: No Salvation in Legalistic Compromises
The Supreme Court’s decision, and the conciliar sect’s celebration of it, are symptoms of the same apostasy: the refusal to confess Jesus Christ is Lord (Philippians 2:11) over the civil order. “There is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12) — not Title IX, not the Equal Protection Clause, not “biological sex” as a legal category. The only remedy for the gender ideology plague is the Social Kingship of Christ, proclaimed by Pius XI, defended by the Syllabus, and preserved only in the true Church that maintains the Traditio integra without admixture of Modernist error. All else is vanitas vanitatum.
Source:
Supreme Court says states can ban men from competing in women’s sports (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 30.06.2026