James Clyburn

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld state laws banning transgender athletes from competing in women's sports.

South Carolina politicians offered mixed reactions to the court's recent rulings.

The court also limited President Trump's ability to restrict birthright citizenship.

The U.S. Supreme Court handed down two consequential decisions on key elements of the Trump agenda on June 30, drawing mixed reactions from South Carolina politicians.

Before adjourning for the summer, the high court upheld two state laws that ban transgender athletes from competing in women's sports, while limiting President Donald Trump's ability to change the law on birthright citizenship.

Supreme Court upholds bans on transgender athletes

Twenty seven states, including South Carolina, have laws that ban transgender women from competing in female sports, according to USA Today. The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that West Virginia's and Idaho's bans on female transgender athletes do not violate the constitution, hindering the future success of legal challenges over other statewide bans.

More: Where Trump's refusal to sign Sen. Scott's housing bill leaves deal

In 2022, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster signed the "Save Women's Sports Act" into law, banning transgender athletes from competing in women's and girls' sports. Republican lawmakers in South Carolina applauded the June 30 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, which provides legal protections for state laws like South Carolina's.

“South Carolina moved quickly to protect women and girls through the Save Women’s Sports Act, despite opposition from Democrats,” majority leader Sen. Shane Massey, R-Edgefield, said in a statement. “Today’s stamp of approval from the Supreme Court validates the hard work of Senate Republicans and ensures this pro-family, pro-science legislation stands the test of time.”

Attorney General Alan Wilson, who recently secured the Republican nomination for governor, also issued a statement responding to the Supreme Court’s decision. Wilson joined 27 other state attorneys general in filing friend-of-the-court briefs in September 2025 urging the hugh court to uphold laws in West Virginia and Idaho.

"This decision is a landmark in the fight to protect women and girls from the left’s woke assault," Wilson said in a statement.

The Greenville News reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina and the South Carolina Democratic Party for comment on the ruling and has not received a response.

Courts oppose Trump's efforts to redefine birthright citizenship

The Supreme Court also ruled against the president after he moved to limit birthright citizenship, which establishes that a child born in the U.S. is automatically a citizen. Trump attempted to restrict birthright citizenship by directing federal agencies to not recognize citizenship of babies born in the U.S. if they do not have at least one parent who is a citizen, according to USA Today.

South Carolina's U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-District 6, commended the Supreme Court's ruling, saying birthright citizenship is a "key tenet of our nation's promise."

"While the result should have been unanimous, today's decision reaffirms that the clear words of the Constitution, not an extremist President, determine who is a citizen at birth," Clyburn said in a statement.

Republican members of Congress criticized the court's rejection of Trump's birthright restrictions. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, said on X that he is now "more determined than ever" to end birthright citizenship, calling it a magnet for illegal immigration.

"I will continue to push to fix this major pull factor for birth tourism and illegal immigration into the U.S.," Graham wrote. "This would align America with the vast majority of the modern world."