Key Points

  • The Appellate Division, Second Department, unanimously reversed a Nassau County Supreme Court order that had upheld Local Law No. 3-2024 and dismissed the Long Island Roller Rebels' complaint.
  • The court held that the State Human Rights Law and Civil Rights Law Section 40-c expressly prohibit the county from restricting access to places of public accommodation based on gender identity or expression, including transgender status.
  • Because of that conflict, the court held the local law's permitting scheme invalid as preempted by state law, relying on the home rule limits in Article IX of the State Constitution and the Municipal Home Rule Law.
  • The court granted the league summary judgment, awarded costs, and remitted the case for entry of a judgment declaring the local law invalid under the State Constitution and the Municipal Home Rule Law.

A New York appeals court on Wednesday struck down a Nassau County law that barred the use of county parks for women's and girls' sporting events open to transgender women, holding that the measure conflicts with the state's antidiscrimination laws and is therefore invalid.

The Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed a trial judge who had upheld the law and instead granted summary judgment to the Long Island Roller Rebels, a women's roller derby league that permits transgender women to compete. The four-justice panel ruled unanimously in an unsigned decision and order joined by Justice Betsy Barros, who presided, and Justices Deborah A. Dowling, Barry E. Warhit and Lisa S. Ottley.

The same court had earlier granted the league a preliminary injunction halting enforcement while the lawsuit was pending. The panel has now sent the case back to the trial court with instructions to enter a judgment declaring the county law invalid under the New York State Constitution and the Municipal Home Rule Law.

The Nassau County Legislature enacted the measure, Local Law No. 3-2024, in 2024. Its title described it as a law "to maintain a safe and fair competitive environment for women and girls participating in sports and athletic events." It prohibits the use of county park property "for the purposes of organizing a sporting event or competition that allows athletic teams or sports designated for females, women, or girls to include biological males as competitors," according to the decision.

The league sued the county and other defendants, seeking a permanent injunction against enforcement. It alleged that the law discriminates against women's leagues with transgender women participants, in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law and Section 40-c of the state's Civil Rights Law.

In an order entered Oct. 15, 2025, Justice R. Bruce Cozzens of State Supreme Court in Nassau County denied the league's motion for summary judgment. The court granted the defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The league appealed.

The appeals court framed the case as a question of local power. A local government is "constitutionally empowered to enact local laws relating to the welfare of its citizens through its police power," the panel wrote. But it may not exercise that power through local laws "inconsistent with the New York State Constitution or any general law of the state," the court added, citing Article IX of the State Constitution and the Municipal Home Rule Law.

The panel then set out the two state laws at issue. Civil Rights Law Section 40-c bars discrimination in a person's civil rights because of sex, "gender identity or expression" and other traits. The prohibition reaches private parties and also acts "by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state."

The Human Rights Law makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for the owner or manager of "any place of public accommodation, resort or amusement" to deny a person its "accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges" because of gender identity or expression, sex or other protected characteristics.

The court also relied on a state regulation that ties the two categories together. The regulation provides that "Discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression is also sex discrimination." It defines gender identity or expression to include "the status of being transgender."

Applying those provisions, the panel concluded that the county law could not stand. "Here, the NYSHRL and Civil Rights Law § 40-c expressly prohibit the County from restricting access to places of public accommodation based on a person's gender identity or expression, including whether the person identifies as transgender," the court wrote.

"Thus, the local law's permitting scheme conflicts with, and is invalid as preempted by, the NYSHRL and Civil Rights Law § 40-c," the panel held, citing its earlier decision in McGrath v. Suffolk County.

The decision does not recount the arguments the county offered in defense of the law, beyond noting its cross-motion to dismiss the complaint.

The panel held that the trial court "should have granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint" and denied the county's cross-motion. It reversed the October 2025 order "on the law," and it awarded costs to the league.

Lawyers for the league included Gabriella Larios of the New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation. The county was represented by the office of Nassau County Attorney Thomas A. Adams.

The case now returns to State Supreme Court in Nassau County. Because the suit is in part a declaratory judgment action, the appeals court directed that court to enter a judgment "declaring that the local law is invalid on the grounds that it violates the New York State Constitution and the Municipal Home Rule Law." The ruling, reported as 2026 NY Slip Op 06427, is marked uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.