REDMOND, WA — There was a good chance there were going to be tears either way, but these were the joyful kind. For years, Tumwater High (WA) student Frances Staudt has been fighting for the separation of boys and girls in sports, and Tuesday night, it appeared she helped score her biggest win yet.
Washington state’s Initiative 638, which would require K-12 athletes to compete on teams aligned with their biological sex, held a substantial lead in unofficial election returns. Staudt, speaking at a watch party hosted by Let’s Go Washington — the organization that spearheaded the initiative — couldn’t contain her emotion.
“We did it!” said Staudt, who said she’s endured daily harassment since refusing to play basketball against a biological boy two in March 2025. “It’s not been an easy fight, and I’m so proud of us. And I’m so happy to be here with a victory. Washington people have had enough.”
Just before Staudt’s speech, the “yes” vote on I-638 held a 13.6 percent lead over “no” with 60 percent of the ballots counted. At press time, prediction market Kalshi gave the measure a 91 percent chance of passing. If approved, it would mark two historic firsts: the first time voters approved a statewide law separating boys’ and girls’ K-12 sports, and the first time such a law was enacted in a blue state.
Twenty-seven other states — all of which Donald Trump won in 2024 — enforce said separation. But those laws were passed by state legislatures, not directly by voters.
Supporters hope I-638 will have a ripple effect across the country, inspiring similar laws in other states.
“I think this is a big bellwether for the state,” said Let’s Go Washington founder Brian Heywood, celebrating an initiative that, if approved, could go into effect within 30 days. “This was citizens who are voting very blue still in a lot of ways saying, hey, it’s not a Republican/Democrat issue, it’s a parental issue, it’s a fairness in girls sports issue. And I think that carries a huge amount of weight.”
ACTIVISTS UNLEASH A ‘NEXT WAVE’ BALLOT STRATEGY FOR WOMEN’S SPORTS INSIDE DEEP BLUE STATES
Heywood filed the initiative in June 2025, needing nearly 309,000 signatures to qualify for the ballot. It reportedly received more than 445,000, with athletes such as Staudt and fellow Washingtonian Ahnaleigh Wilson helping collect signatures.
The campaign also drew attention to a controversy involving a transgender cross-country runner at Camas High School who switched from the boys’ team to the girls’ team during the season.
After finishing 76th in a boys’ junior varsity race in September 2025, the sophomore began competing in girls’ races, later winning a varsity event and finishing second in three others. Critics argued that the runner’s participation affected other female athletes’ opportunities to advance to regional and state competitions.
The controversy intensified in October when approximately a dozen female teammates walked off the starting line at a meet in protest. The incident became a rallying point for supporters of I-638.
Women’s sports advocate Amy Sousa, who documented the walk-off on video, has spent nearly a decade advocating for restrictions on transgender athletes in female sports. Although the election results remained unofficial, she celebrated the measure’s early lead.
“I’m so happy, I’m so pleased, I’m so proud, and I just feel like this is right. It feels right. It is right,” Sousa said. “This is protecting Title IX, the promise of what our foremothers fought for — on the basis of sex.”
IS COLORADO CLOSE TO PASSING A SIMILAR MEASURE?
In Colorado, a similar ballot measure was also leading, although by a narrower margin. Proposition 134 would establish sex-based eligibility requirements for K-12 and college athletics, extending the proposed restrictions beyond those included in Washington’s initiative.
At press time, the “yes” vote led by 4.4 percentage points, with an estimated 75% of ballots counted. The outcome remained uncertain as election officials continued counting votes.
“Without knowing the outcome yet (and heading to go to sleep), I am cautiously optimistic that in a deep blue state, with a deep blue election wave, the voters will have said ‘protect girls’ sports’ when all votes are counted,” said Jennifer Sey, chair of the Proposition 134 campaign and founder of XX-XY Athletics, in a comment to OutKick. “This was never a partisan issue. It’s a common-sense issue. Basic truth and biological reality don’t have a party.”
ARIZONA AND NEBRASKA VOTERS CONSIDER ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS
Arizona and Nebraska also had sports-related ballot measures on Tuesday’s ballots, although both states already restrict transgender athletes from competing in female sports.
Nebraska’s Initiative 442, which had received more than twice as many votes in favor as against at publication time, would place the state’s existing restrictions in its constitution, making them more difficult to repeal.
Arizona’s Proposition 318, which led by 14.6 percentage points, would expand the state’s existing restrictions on transgender participation in girls’ and women’s sports to private schools and athletic associations. It would also establish sex-based requirements for access to athletic locker rooms and restrooms.
But the bigger stories are in Washington and Colorado — two blue states where voters are weighing changes to the rules governing girls’ and women’s sports. Teenagers such as Staudt have long been calling for action. It appears that the adults finally followed suit.
