‘Collide with the will of the people’: Curley questions Seattle schools’ legal action over transgender eligibility in girls’ sports
Nov 12, 2026, 9:13 AM
KIRO Newsradio host John Curley questioned the Seattle School Board’s authorization of legal action over Initiative 638, Washington’s voter-approved restriction on transgender girls participating in girls’ school sports. The board unanimously approved a resolution allowing the district to hire lawyers and pursue legal action over the measure.
On “The John Curley Show,” Curley argued that an order blocking the initiative could put a judge at odds with voters, while acknowledging difficulties with enforcement.
“You’re going to get a single judge to collide with the will of the people,” Curley said. “I really think that it’s going to come down to how they choose to enforce it, and that could be a really difficult situation.”
Seattle schools seek clarity on implementation
Curley played a news report describing concerns that the initiative’s verification requirements could subject girls to scrutiny and invasions of privacy not imposed on boys. The report also included concerns about conflicts with existing state laws and constitutional protections.
“So one judge is going to have to look and go, ‘Well, discrimination, invasion of privacy, right?’” Curley said.
The board’s resolution authorized legal action but did not specify what form it would take.
“Now it’s going to go to court, and 638 will be challenged,” Curley said.
Curley compares sports and income tax challenges
Curley addressed why opponents of Washington’s millionaires tax could seek relief in court while supporters of I-638 objected to a challenge against the sports measure.
“Why is it okay for them to go to court? It’s not okay for the people at 638 to go to court?” Curley said. “What’s that all about?”
He distinguished between a tax enacted by lawmakers and a sports restriction approved by voters.
“Here’s the difference between the two. Yes, they’re both going to court,” Curley said.
“The other, 638, is that the voters made the law on that one.”
Using I-645 as shorthand for the income tax dispute, Curley described tax opponents’ argument that lawmakers violated constitutional requirements.
“The lawmakers broke the rules, and the court is needed to step in to uphold the Constitution,” Curley said. “That’s the 645 argument.”
He contrasted that with the privacy and equal-rights arguments surrounding I-638.
“It’s asking the court to expand the meaning, not just stick to 90 years of a status quo,” Curley said. “You’re going to expand what the rights are.”
Curley draws on youth football rules
Curley used his experience coaching youth football to compare sports eligibility rules based on age, weight and sex.
“We discriminated against the kids that weighed too much because, yes, it was a safety issue,” Curley said.
He recalled allowing a child who exceeded the weight limit to play and getting in trouble afterward.
“There was a rule, and the rule was you couldn’t be over,” Curley said.
He also described adults requesting birth certificates when they suspected older children were competing against younger players.
“They discriminate based upon the age,” Curley said. “Why do they discriminate? Because they don’t want an older kid getting in there and dominating. Why do they discriminate on weight? It’s for safety’s sake.”
Curley puts safety and fairness at the center of the argument
Curley argued that separate sports categories serve a similar purpose.
“Why are they discriminating against boys and girls sports?” Curley said. “Because it’s a safety thing. Plus, it’s a fairness issue, and that’s it.”
He returned to his concern about a court potentially blocking the initiative.
“Yes, they’re both going through the process, but one of them is going to have the judge collide with the will of the people,” Curley said.
Watch the full discussion in the video above.
Listen to The John Curley Show weekday afternoons from 3 – 7 p.m. on KIRO Newsradio, 97.3 FM. Subscribe to the podcast here.



