The running world has long prided itself on being one of the most inclusive spaces in sports. Whether you’re an elite competitor chasing an Olympic dream or an everyday runner simply trying to finish 26.2 miles, marathons are supposed to be for everyone.
But that could soon change.
With President Donald Trump’s recent executive order, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” banning transgender women from competing in women’s sports, race organizers are now facing big, messy questions about how this might impact some of the biggest marathons in the world—including the Boston, New York City, and Chicago Marathons.
Even though these races don’t operate under NCAA or Olympic rules, they still rely on municipal governments, law enforcement, and city permits, which could bring them into conflict with new federal regulations.
And while no marathon has yet announced a policy change, the reality is that some kind of response will be necessary—especially as legal challenges and political pressures ramp up.
A Tradition of Inclusivity—Now Under Threat?
For the last several years, the Major Marathons have been actively working to be more inclusive.
- The Boston Marathon began allowing non-binary athletes to register under their gender identity in 2023.
- The New York City Marathon has long been open to transgender runners competing in their identified category.
- The Chicago Marathon even has a non-binary prize purse, recognizing gender-diverse athletes in the elite field.
These policies weren’t controversial in the broader running community. Most runners and race directors saw them as a natural step toward inclusion in a sport that, for decades, has been about personal achievement rather than exclusion.
But Trump’s new executive order changes the playing field—literally.
Under the new policy, Title IX will now be enforced based strictly on biological sex at birth.
Schools and universities that don’t comply with the ban on trans athletes in women’s sports risk losing federal funding.
And while marathons aren’t technically governed by Title IX, they do work closely with local and state governments for security, street closures, and race-day logistics.
That raises a major question: Could marathons that continue allowing transgender women to compete in female categories face legal or financial consequences?
Could Marathons Lose City Support?
Even though most major marathons are organized by nonprofit groups or private race organizations, they depend heavily on city resources.
Take the New York City Marathon, for example.
The race isn’t just a private event—it’s an enormous undertaking that shuts down roads and bridges across five boroughs, involves thousands of police officers, and receives direct support from the city government.
The same goes for the Boston Marathon and the Chicago Marathon, which rely on local law enforcement, state agencies, and city funding to operate smoothly.
If city officials—especially in more conservative states—start aligning with Trump’s new policy, they could pressure race organizers to change their rules. This might mean:
- Forcing marathons to require birth certificates for registration, ensuring that only athletes assigned female at birth can compete in the women’s division.
- Stripping city funding, law enforcement support, or permits from races that don’t comply.
- Banning trans women from competing outright, regardless of previous policies.
While cities like New York, Boston, and Chicago are historically more progressive and may push back, other races—like those in Texas, Florida, and other red states—could be much more vulnerable to these changes. Although, New York City’s mayor, Eric Adams, has reportedly been courting Trump’s favor in order to get a Federal indictment for corruption charges against him dropped.
Will The Chicago, Boston, and NYC Marathons Stand Their Ground?
So far, no major U.S. marathon has publicly responded to Trump’s executive order, but behind closed doors, you can bet discussions are happening.
Race organizers will have to decide whether to stand by their inclusive policies or cave to external pressures.
If they stick with their existing policies and allow transgender women to continue competing in the women’s division, they could face political backlash, legal challenges, and potential funding threats from conservative lawmakers.
If they reverse course and bar transgender athletes, they risk alienating runners, sponsors, and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups, many of whom have been strong allies of major marathons in recent years.
And if the International Olympic Committee (IOC) eventually follows Trump’s lead, this could trickle down to qualifying races, impacting elite transgender runners hoping to compete in the Olympics.
