Transgender women athletes are now excluded from all women’s events at the Olympic Games in accordance with a new policy from the International Olympic Committee (IOC).
The policy will be implemented from the 2028 Olympic Games onward.
Female category events at the Olympics, or any other IOC events, will now be limited to “biological females.”
Eligibility will be determined by a onetime SRY (sex-determining region Y protein) gene screening via saliva, cheek swab, or blood sample, which the IOC considers “unintrusive compared to other possible methods.”
“The policy that we have announced is based on science and has been led by medical experts,” said IOC president Kirsty Coventry, who is also an Olympic champion in swimming. “At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can be the difference between victory and defeat. So, it is absolutely clear that it would not be fair for biological males to compete in the female category. In addition, in some sports it would simply not be safe.”
Those who screen SRY-negative permanently satisfy the policy’s eligibility criteria for competition. Athletes with a positive screen are ineligible for any female categories but can continue to be included in any male or open category or in events that do not classify athletes by sex (such as equestrian events).
The IOC considers the presence of the SRY gene to represent accurate evidence that an athlete has experienced male sex development, stating in a 10-page policy document that virtually all athletes who screen positive will have testes or testicles that produce testosterone at adult male levels.
Exceptions in eligibility
In the rarest cases, an exception may be afforded to female athletes diagnosed with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS) or other differences in sex development (DSD) that “preclude testosterone’s anabolic and/or performance-enhancing effects,” the IOC said in its policy update on Thursday.
Discussions about athletes with DSD were brought to the global stage by two-time Olympic champion runner Caster Semenya. The South African athlete has a DSD and has been banned from competing in her event since 2019.
She refuses to abide by the World Athletics rules to reduce her hormone levels with medication. Semenya’s seven-year legal battle against sex eligibility rules in track and field has received wide attention.
“I have carried this weight. So have other women of color who deserved better from sport,” Semenya said in a statement to The New York Times. “Reintroducing genetic screening is not progress—it is walking backward.”
In 2023, Algerian boxer Imane Khelif and Taiwanese boxer Lin Yu-ting were disqualified from the World Championships by the International Boxing Association (IBA) for allegedly failing gender eligibility tests.
The following year at the Paris Olympics, Khelif went on to win gold in the women’s welterweight division, still facing scrutiny over gender eligibility. At the time, the IOC allowed her and Lin to compete.
Last month, Khelif told CNN that she has nothing to hide and will comply with gene-testing requirements enforced by the IOC in order to be eligible for the 2028 Olympics.
The first openly transgender woman to compete in the Olympics was Laurel Hubbard, a New Zealand weightlifter. While she did not win a medal, she still made history at the 2020 Summer Olympics.
Responses to the policy
The IOC’s policy follows President Donald Trump’s executive order, “Keeping Men Out of Women Sports,” from February 2025. In a news conference on Thursday, IOC President Coventry said her decision on the policy had not been influenced by Trump’s views.
In a statement, White House spokesman Davis Ingle said: “The IOC aligning their policy with President Trump’s executive order ahead of the 2028 L.A. Games is common sense and long overdue.”
Pushback against the IOC’s policy came from Brian Dittmeier, director of LGBTQI+ equality at the National Women’s Law Center.
In a statement, Dittmeier said: “By mandating sex testing and excluding transgender and intersex women from competition, the International Olympic Committee is embracing a policy that invites confusion, stigma, and invasive scrutiny rather than clarity or safety.”
