Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Prevents male students from joining women's sports teams at military academies.
The problem
Some people believe males participating in women's athletic programs at military service academies creates fairness concerns in competition and raises questions about equal opportunity.
The proposal
The bill would prohibit male students from participating in athletic programs or activities designated for women or girls at U.S. military service academies.
The impact
Male and female cadets at military academies would face restrictions on which sports teams they can join. Athletic programs at academies would need to enforce gender-based team eligibility.
Ensures women cadets have dedicated athletic spaces and competitive opportunities. Supporters argue this maintains fair competition based on biological differences in athletic performance.
Military academies are specialized institutions with specific missions and traditions. This policy targets a narrow environment rather than all schools.
Many athletic organizations separate men's and women's competitions. This aligns academies with broader sports practices.
Cadets would lose freedom to choose which team to join based on ability or interest. This reduces personal autonomy in selecting athletic programs.
Gender-based eligibility rules could face legal challenges under equal protection arguments. Litigation costs and uncertainty may burden academies.
The bill targets a specific, likely small problem at military academies. No data shows this is a widespread issue affecting academy operations.
Military academies seek to build inclusive communities. Gender-based team restrictions could conflict with broader inclusion initiatives.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
S 4668
Protect College Sports Act of 2026
HR 9723
Fit Future Act
HRES 1487
Recognizing the 1960 University of Missouri Tigers Football Team for its undefeated regular season, Orange Bowl victory, and claim to the 1960 National Championship.
HRES 1482
Recognizing 100 years of American Legion Baseball and the American Legion World Series, and honoring the city of Shelby, North Carolina, for serving as the permanent home of the American Legion World Series.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.