A Republican bill with 10 Republican cosponsors · See all 10 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Riley Gaines Act aims to allow certain civil actions regarding student-athlete competitions. It targets institutions of higher education and athletic associations. This applies if they negligently or recklessly permit a biologically male student athlete to compete in competitions intended exclusively for females. The bill focuses on cases where a female student athlete suffers physical injury due to physiological advantages. Under this act, such athletes could seek damages in Federal district court.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +6
Would women be better off under this?
The bill empowers female athletes to seek legal recourse for physical harm and lost opportunities caused by competition with biological males.
- Scored +5
Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated?
The bill provides female student-athletes a legal pathway to seek damages for injuries resulting from biological male participation in female-exclusive competitions.
- Scored +4
Would students be better off under this?
The bill provides a mechanism for injured student-athletes to recover the value of lost scholarships.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Right to seek damages: Female student athletes who are physically injured due to the inherent physiological advantages of a biologically male student athlete in female-only competitions may bring a civil action for damages (Section 2(a)).
- Compensation for lost opportunities: The bill allows for the recovery of damages that include the value of a lost scholarship or professional opportunity (Section 2(a)).
- Coverage of legal costs: A prevailing plaintiff in these civil actions would be awarded a reasonable attorney's fee (Section 2(b)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Financial liability for institutions: Institutions of higher education or athletic associations could face civil actions for damages if they are found to have negligently or recklessly permitted a biologically male student athlete to compete in female-exclusive competitions resulting in physical injury (Section 2(a)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would women be better off under this? — The bill empowers female athletes to seek legal recourse for physical harm and lost opportunities caused by competition with biological males. Would students be better off under this? — The bill provides a mechanism for injured student-athletes to recover the value of lost scholarships. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — The bill protects the scholarship and professional opportunities of female student-athletes during their collegiate or early professional years. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill helps protect the financial value of scholarships for female student-athletes.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — The bill provides female student-athletes a legal pathway to seek damages for injuries resulting from biological male participation in female-exclusive competitions.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill establishes a specific federal cause of action and legal remedy for female athletes to seek compensation in federal court.
- 4/16/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/27/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/17/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/26/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/24/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/23/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/11/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/10/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/4/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Introduced in House
Rick AllenRepublican · Georgia
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
Kat CammackRepublican · Florida
Ben ClineRepublican · Virginia
Clay HigginsRepublican · Louisiana
Anna Paulina LunaRepublican · Florida
Mary MillerRepublican · Illinois
John RoseRepublican · Tennessee
Christopher SmithRepublican · New Jersey
W. SteubeRepublican · Florida