## Facts

- Dr. Renee Richards, a New York-licensed ophthalmologist, underwent sex-reassignment surgery about two years before suit and lived socially and physically as a woman.
- Before surgery, Richards competed successfully in men’s tennis, including high regional and national rankings in age-group play.
- After surgery, Richards entered multiple women’s tournaments, winning some events and reaching finals in others.
- The USTA instituted a sex-determination requirement for women entrants in the U.S. Open, using a sex-chromatin (Barr body) test, and required Richards to pass it as a condition of competing in the women’s division.
- Richards challenged the Barr body test as medically unreliable and unfair for determining eligibility to compete by gender, particularly for post-operative transsexual women.
- Defendants asserted the test was necessary to protect competitive fairness, contending that persons born male may retain physiological advantages.
- Richards submitted medical evidence that her hormonal status, anatomy, muscle development, and overall physical condition were within typical female ranges after transition-related treatment.
- Richards also alleged exclusion through a related eligibility practice tied to professional status because the WTA declined to rank her as a woman, which the USTA treated as relevant to entry into the women’s draw.
- Richards sued under the New York Human Rights Law and also alleged a Fourteenth Amendment violation, seeking a preliminary injunction allowing her to attempt to qualify for and compete in the women’s division of the U.S. Open.

## Issues

1. Whether requiring a post-operative transsexual woman to pass a Barr body test as a condition of playing in the women’s division constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under the New York Human Rights Law.
2. Whether using the test requirement and related eligibility criteria (including reliance on WTA ranking practices) to bar participation is unreasonable or arbitrary so as to warrant preliminary injunctive relief.

## Decision

- The court granted a preliminary injunction in Richards’s favor.
- The court held that the USTA’s use of the Barr body test as an exclusionary condition for Richards was discriminatory under the New York Human Rights Law.
- The court ordered that Richards be permitted to attempt to qualify for, and if she qualified, participate in the women’s division of the U.S. Open as a woman.

## Legal Principles

- Sex-based eligibility rules for public athletic competition must be reasonable and non-arbitrary and must not operate as unlawful discrimination under the New York Human Rights Law.
- Sex verification in sport is justified only to prevent fraud (e.g., men posing as women), and absent evidence of fraud, exclusion requires a sound, fact-based rationale.
- Chromosomal screening (Barr body testing) is not, by itself, a sufficiently reliable or fair basis for excluding an athlete from women’s competition where medical evidence shows the athlete’s overall characteristics fall within typical female ranges.
- For competitive classification, sex may be determined by multiple factors, including psychological and social identity, hormonal status, anatomy, and overall physical condition, rather than by chromosomes alone.
- A claimed competitive advantage must be supported by persuasive evidence; speculative assertions do not justify exclusionary practices that deny equal opportunity.

## Conclusion

The court enjoined the USTA from barring Dr. Renee Richards from the women’s U.S. Open based on a Barr body test requirement, finding the test’s use against her arbitrary and discriminatory under New York’s Human Rights Law and ordering that she be allowed to attempt to qualify for and compete in the women’s division.


Richards v. U.S. Tennis Ass'n, 93 Misc. 2d 713 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. 1977)