The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday vacated a case that claimed the rights of a transgender inmate in a Colorado prison were violated when the prison did not cater to the inmate’s treatment preferences.
The case, Roybal v. Griffith, began in 2020 when Darlene Griffith, a biological male who identifies as a transgender woman and has lived as such for more than 20 years, was held as a pretrial detainee at the El Paso County Jail in Colorado. Griffith requested housing in a female unit but was placed in a male section. Jail officials also denied access to items such as lipstick and female undergarments available to female inmates.
Lawyers for Griffith argued that these actions violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which requires states to treat people equally under the law without unjustified differences.
A lower federal court sided with Griffith on the equal protection claims related to housing assignment and the denial of requested items, and it also took issue with the strip-search approach. The 10th Circuit, in a February 2025 decision by a divided panel, revived the lawsuit and allowed the equal protection claims to proceed.
The appeals court applied a higher level of judicial review to the sex-based policies, finding that Griffith had stated a plausible claim. The jail officials, led by Sheriff Joseph Roybal, then petitioned the Supreme Court, arguing that prison administrators need flexibility in managing facilities and that traditional deference to their decisions should apply.
“The Petition boils down to a plea for ‘administrative flexibility and deference,’ but prisons receive that regardless of the level of scrutiny applied to equal protection claims; deference in the unique context of prisons is baked into the analysis,” Griffith’s lawyers wrote in opposing the petition.
POLL: Should Trump’s DOJ Prosecute Jack Smith?
The US Supreme Court overturned a ruling that a Colorado inmate had his rights violated because the prison housing him declined to give him lipstick, female undergarments, and access to the women’s living quarters.
The lawyers of the inmate, Darlene Griffith, claimed that the… pic.twitter.com/KvJNZyMGju
— AF Post (@AFpost) November 10, 2026
The Trump Administration, through Solicitor General John Sauer, filed a brief supporting the Colorado officials. “‘When a sex-based classification is justified as a constitutional matter’ – ‘for example,’ in ‘women’s and girls’ sports’ – then a State ‘may treat all biological males the same and treat all biological females the same’; it ‘is not constitutionally required to grant individualized exemptions to specific [persons] or subclasses,’” Sauer argued.
In Monday’s decision, Supreme Court pointed to its June 2026 ruling in West Virginia v. B.P.J., which upheld state laws limiting participation in girls’ and women’s sports to biological females under the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX, and to its 2025 decision in United States v. Skrmetti, which permitted a state ban on certain medical treatments for transgender minors. The unanimous ruling vacated the lower court decision and sent the case back to the 10th Circuit appeals court for further review.
Separately, the Court on October 21 declined to block a Biden-era federal policy allowing hormone therapy and gender-related surgeries for prisoners. The Trump administration has sought to restrict federal funding for such procedures.
Justice Department figures indicate roughly 1,000 federal prisoners identify as transgender, and about $1.65 million in taxpayer funds supported related procedures during the prior administration.
