“She is the first woman in history to win the 100 and 200 meters in back-to-back Olympics.”

That is how USA Today summarized the performance of Elaine Thompson-Herah, the Jamaican sprinter who dominated women’s track events in the COVID-delayed 2021 Olympics.

Thompson-Herah won a third gold medal in Tokyo that year as the first runner on Jamaica’s 4×100 yard relay team.

In the 100-meter race, she not only won gold for the second Olympics in a row, but set an Olympic record by running the race in 10.61 seconds.

That was the second-fastest 100 meters any woman has ever run in any competition, according to the Mirror. The only woman who ever ran faster was Florence Griffith-Joyner, an American, who in 1988 set the women’s world record of 10.49 seconds in the 100-meter dash.

But what if Elaine Thompson-Herah had been forced to run in the men’s 100-meter final at the Tokyo Olympics?

She would have finished last.

The slowest contestant in the men’s 100-meter final in Tokyo was Bingtian Su of the People’s Republic of China. His last-place finish was timed at 9.98 seconds—0.63 seconds faster than Thompson-Herah’s Olympic record of 10.61 seconds in the women’s final.

The swimming competition saw similar results at the Tokyo Olympics.

Emma McKeon of Australia won the 100-meter freestyle swimming race with a time of 51.96. Caeleb Dressel of the United States won the men’s 100-meter freestyle with a time of 47.02. The slowest swimmer in the men’s 100-meter final in Tokyo was Nandor Nemeth of Hungary, who had a time of 48.10.

Nemeth’s last-place time in the men’s race was 3.86 seconds faster than McKeon’s winning time in the women’s race.

What is the lesson here?

President Joe Biden is once again exposing his radical idiocy by opposing legislation that would prevent biological men from competing in women’s sports at federally funded institutions.

The House Rules Committee last week sent to the full House a bill (HR 734), called the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. As the House Committee on Education and the Workforce explained in its report on the bill, it has a simple—and important—purpose. It would prohibit “a recipient of federal financial assistance who operates, sponsors, or facilitates athletic programs or activities to permit a person whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program or activity that is designated for women or girls.” [Editor’s note: The House on Thursday passed HR 734 along party lines, 219 to 203, without a single Democratic vote.]

The committee’s report further explained that, in the context of this legislation, “sex shall be recognized based solely on a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.”

So, for example, a 6-foot-10-inch 290-pound biological male could not play center on the women’s basketball team.

Nor could a male high school student who hit 50 home runs as a junior on the varsity baseball team switch to the women’s softball team in his senior year.

Biden claims the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act is “discrimination,” and his White House last week put out a statement condemning it.

“The Administration strongly opposes the House passage of HR 734,” said the statement.

“HR 734 would deny access to sports for many families by establishing an absolute ban on transgender students—even those as young as elementary schoolers—playing on a team consistent with their gender identity,” the White House said.

“Discrimination has no place in our nation’s schools or on our playing fields,” it said. “Congressional Republicans have instead chosen to prioritize policies that discriminate against children.”

“If the president were presented with HR 734, he would veto it,” said the White House.

Were Biden to do so, he would be mocked by history—for mindlessly engaging in a battle with a biological fact: There are two human sexes, male and female.

This nation was founded on the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” As the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. famously noted in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail: “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.”

Laws and regulations that require or permit schools to pretend that biological males are actually females—or that let biological males compete on female athletic teams—violate the natural law. They are unjust.

The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act would be a just law in keeping with the natural law.

If Congress passes the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act and Biden vetoes it, he would be guilty of an unjust act that violates the natural law.

His victims would be women and girls in schools all across America.


The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.