1. United States
2. Calif.
3. Letter

Today I take pen in hand to write and urge you to oppose the nomination of Justin Ross Olson to the District Court. Olson has built his recent legal career on litigation designed to exclude transgender athletes from collegiate sports, and has extreme views on a woman’s right to choose, so this raises serious concerns about his ability to serve as an impartial federal judge. Olson describes himself as a ‘specialist’ in Title IX litigation aimed at excluding transgender athletes from sports. In the now-famous Riley Gaines, et al. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, et al., he argued that allowing a transgender athlete to participate in the 2022 NCAA Division I Women's Swimming and Diving Championship violated Title IX and the Fourteenth Amendment. He also claimed that officials at University of Georgia and Georgia Tech Athletic Association caused harm by allowing their facilities to even be used for training any transgender athletes. This case may determine Title IX's applicability to the NCAA, yet Olson has demonstrated he thinks the long-standing Title IX rules need to be scrapped in favor of his own ‘opinion. He’s clearly got a predetermined stance on these issues. In Brooke Slusser, et al. v. Mountain West Conference, et al., Olson sought a preliminary injunction to bar a transgender athlete from participating on the SJSU Women's Volleyball team, arguing violations of Title IX, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the First Amendment. The Court denied his request. Throughout his legal materials in these cases, Olson regularly misgenders transgender athletes, demonstrating a lack of basic respect that is incompatible with judicial temperament. Olson's membership in Alliance Defending Freedom, the Federalist Society, and the Republican National Lawyers Association since 2024 and 2025 further signals his ideological commitments. In my view, these are disqualifying memberships. They have never represented judicial norms, but personal and racial bias, and are not in favor of just laws that benefit the vast majority, but a tiny minority of warped people like Olson. His 2013 Indiana Law Journal article arguing that courts should ignore religious motives of legislators when evaluating abortion informed consent laws reveals a further troubling approach to constitutional interpretation. In my view, Federal judges must demonstrate fairness and impartiality toward all people who appear before them. Olson's record shows he has built his practice around denying the dignity and equal treatment of transgender individuals. I urge you to vote against his confirmation and ensure our federal bench reflects the values of equal justice under law. Thank you.