- Well, it's so interesting.

You played basketballin college and served

as a women's Division Ibasketball coach for years.

So you know women's sports.

How did your story influence your thinking

as you approach thisbill, which is now law?

- Well, people have to understand

that if you're my age or older,

I was born in the '60s,I grew up in the '70s,

and the opportunities that wereavailable to me were so few.

It was anticipated when I was growing up

that I would probably be,you know, a stay at home mom,

which would have been great,

but I never ended up getting married.

You know, my options werelike stay at home mom,

to be a secretary, you know,something along that lines.

Very limited opportunities,and when people have asked me

what I wanted to do when I grew up,

I would tell them thatI wanted to play sports.

And I literally was toldthat's not what girls do.

And so in 1972 when Title IX was passed,

I had no idea as a little girl

how much that would change my life.

Title IX changed my life.

And so as I held onto mydreams and kept working

and had an opportunityto play in junior high

there in the late '70s,

something a lot of young girlsdidn't have an opportunity,

then to play at highschool, play collegiately.

And then to go on and coachDivision I women's basketball

for 15 years at fourfantastic institutions.

Even as a head coach,it was life changing.

And so, knowing thedirection that women's sports

has found itself, wherebiological boys and men

have been entering and not just entering,

winning, dominating, Ifelt it was important

to protect those opportunitiesfor young girls and women.

To protect those opportunities

just as they had been done for me,

just as women before mehave paid that path forward,

I do feel and have felt a responsibility

to do that for those whowere to follow after me.

- Well, as you know, JudgeNye wrote in his recent ruling

that quote, "The state has not identified

"a legitimate interest served by the act

"that the preexisting rules inIdaho did not already address

"other than an invalid interest

"of excluding transgender women and girls

"from women's sports entirely

"regardless of theirphysiological characteristics."

What is your response tothat ruling from the judge?

- Well, it's unfortunate.

Sometimes it's difficult tounderstand athletics and sports

if you haven't been a participant in it.

We simply cannot compete

against those inherentphysiological advantages

that males have that never go away,

even with some hormone suppressant.

You can never change thestature of one's body,

the length of the limbs,the density of the bones,

largeness of the heart and lungs.

The fact that in every fiber of their DNA

is stamped the XY chromosome,

that when you have two very similar

biological male and female athletes

training at the same level,

that biological male athlete will improve,

get stronger, quicker, faster,

and in all levels thanthe female athlete would.

So I have seen it firsthand all my life

that these biological malessimply have an advantage

that we never will.

That's why they are dominatingthe women's sports scene.

And it's so unfortunate.

I just don't think JudgeNye truly understood.

I believe that the narrative nationally

has been so dominated bythose on the other side,

that it's easy for peopleto believe that narrative

and fail to see that the whole reason

Title IX was put into place in1972 was because as females,

we couldn't compete withour male counterparts.

And if we didn't have--

- I'll ask you about thatnational conversation,

if I can interrupt you, because of course

at the Democratic NationalConvention this week

there's a lot of talk about kids

who identify as transgender,

concerns about their mentalhealth, physical health.

What is your response to people who say

that you're not concerned about these kids

and in particular athleteswho identify as transgender?

- Well, it's simply not true.

I actually support all people

in deciding who and what they want to be.

I mean, if someone wants toidentify as a biological,

I mean, as a female, that is fantastic.

I support their choice 100%.

But this is a truism in life.

Though they have andcan make those choices,

none of us are free tochoose the consequences,

those consequences in life.

And whatever we do will bechosen oftentimes for us.

And this is one of those areas.

In the arena of sport,biological boys and mens

should not be allowedto compete with women.

And keep this in mind too,

that this legislation does not prevent

a biological boy or male from competing.

They absolutely can competejust as they have done.

They've all come to thispoint from the male side

to compete on the female side.

So they've already been competing.

So they need to continue to compete

on their biological sex side.

That's what this legislation states.

- All right, the story is not over,

but you're definitely at the center of it.

Representative Ehardt,thanks for your time.

Thank you so much.