ROCHESTER, N.Y. — In a sports landscape increasingly fraught with political battles over transgender inclusion, one collegiate athlete has emerged as a lightning rod in the debate. Sadie Schreiner, a track and field sprinter at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT), has spent her offseason attempting to transfer into a Division I program with a full scholarship. Despite being a two-time NCAA Division III All-American last season in the 200 and 400 meters, her efforts have hit a wall that she attributes to restrictive state laws and university policies on transgender participation in women’s sports.
On Tuesday, Schreiner’s frustrations boiled over publicly when she posted a lengthy rant to social media platforms, criticizing the NCAA and the overall lack of support for trans student-athletes. While she contends that a variety of obstacles can complicate transfers for any competitor, her experience carries added layers of complexity because she is a transgender woman. Some schools that initially demonstrated interest in recruiting Schreiner ultimately withdrew their scholarship offers, citing uncertainty about transgender participation policies at the state or institutional level.
“Fifty percent of the country banned me from participating, so I couldn’t attend any of those colleges, even if they reached out to me with a full ride,” Schreiner said in a video posted on her Instagram account. “It also became clear that states that did allow me to participate—no matter how adamant the coaches were—had college administrations that would usually stop them from offering me a spot on the team.”
National and Political Context
While transgender participation in sports continues to be a divisive issue across the country, 25 U.S. states currently have laws restricting transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports categories. Schreiner’s quest to find a Division I home has been complicated by the patchwork of legislation and its potential repercussions. Many athletic departments across the nation face pressures both internally and externally—from lawmakers, donors, and board members—when navigating the policies surrounding trans inclusivity.
“Trans people are actively getting attacked right now and our rights are getting stripped away,” Schreiner told Fox News Digital. “Those in power are either endorsing this or they’re just letting it happen.”
Her fears are mirrored in the broader transgender community. Advocates argue that this hostile environment discourages many trans athletes from even attempting to compete or transfer because support on campus might be insufficient to guarantee a stable and respectful experience.
Further heightening tensions is the looming presence of President-elect Donald Trump, who has vowed to “ban” what he calls “male participation in women’s sports” at all levels when he returns to office on January 20. For athletes like Schreiner, these kinds of political statements only amplify concerns that their futures in women’s athletics could be jeopardized by federal actions. While the legality and practicality of such a sweeping ban remain uncertain, the rhetoric alone can be enough to deter a university’s administration from taking on a trans student-athlete.
The RIT Sprinter’s Rise and Controversy
Schreiner’s athletic achievements at RIT propelled her into the national spotlight in May, when she qualified for and competed in the NCAA Division III Outdoor Track & Field Championships. Despite her performance, controversy followed swiftly. Critics accused her of having an unfair advantage due to male puberty, echoing accusations that have been leveled at other transgender athletes in recent years.
“Out of all the hate that’s been shared of me, ‘cheater’ is the most common word used,” Schreiner posted on her social media channels. “In my eyes, the discussion of trans inclusion in athletics shouldn’t even be a debate.”
She went on to cite studies, including research conducted for the Olympic Games, that show hormone therapy significantly reduces performance advantages over time. Schreiner emphasized that her times have plateaued or even slowed compared to her pre-transition performances, suggesting that any advantage she might have held before her transition no longer exists.
Transfer Portal Struggles and Scholarship Offers
In June, Schreiner officially entered the NCAA transfer portal, aiming to compete at the Division I level to sharpen her skills and possibly secure the financial support she needed to finish her degree. By her own account, she reached out to 42 Division I programs, 18 of which expressed interest and initiated contact with her. Of those, three extended formal scholarship offers—an unusually high number for track and field, where full-ride scholarships are rare.
However, the wave of optimism quickly subsided. One of those universities was located in a state that bars transgender women from competing in women’s sports. Meanwhile, 10 schools in states that permit transgender participation ultimately backed out as well, citing administrative hesitations. Schreiner claimed that in at least four of those instances, the head coaches were eager to bring her on board, but higher-level administrators overruled them.
“The coaches that were talking to me weren’t the issue, it was the school administrators,” Schreiner explained to OutSports. “At least four of these institutions were in the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, or SEC—major conferences with significant resources. Yet they still decided not to move forward because of potential political backlash or internal policy.”
Jen Fry, a diversity and equity consultant who has worked with various collegiate programs, told OutSports last year that many university administrators feel uncertain in navigating the changing political environment. With the national discourse turning increasingly volatile, administrators worry that sporting events could become flashpoints for political upheaval, donor withdrawal, or public protest.
“Not only is there no road map, they are literally going through the forest and having to cut down massive trees while trying to think about the athlete’s safety and the team’s safety,” Fry stated, referring to an analogous controversy at San Jose State University.
NCAA’s Stance and Future Regulations
The NCAA has updated its transgender participation policies multiple times in recent years, striving to align with evolving Olympic and U.S. national governing body standards. NCAA President Charlie Baker, however, has shown reluctance to offer a firm stance amid varying state laws and mounting political pressure. When questioned by anti-trans senators during a hearing on sports gambling last month, Baker cited conflicting court decisions and appealed for clearer federal guidance, deflecting responsibility onto lawmakers rather than NCAA leadership.
“Part of our challenge is a very murky set of court decisions at the state and federal level around this issue,” Baker said, addressing the Senate panel. “Which creates a certain lack of clarity around our policy because our policy ultimately needs to comply with federal policy.”
The NCAA’s new roster and scholarship regulations set to begin in fall 2025 leave trans athletes like Schreiner wondering how these changes might impact their eligibility. While the updated guidelines are meant to create more equitable opportunities in athletics, it’s unclear if they will fully address the complications that arise for transgender athletes when state laws conflict with national sports policies.
Schreiner’s Determination and Next Steps
Despite the setbacks, Schreiner remains resolute. Her immediate plan is to continue competing for RIT in the indoor track season while maintaining her search for a Division I opportunity. She has also voiced her commitment to elevating the conversation about transgender athlete inclusion rather than allowing fear and misinformation to dictate her future.
“I aimed to transfer in order to not only improve my athletic ability in a more competitive environment, but also to help with the funds I needed to complete my degree,” she said. “It will now likely be impossible to do so—but I’m still going to race.”
Schreiner’s vocal stance highlights a stark reality for the small but growing population of transgender student-athletes in collegiate sports: even in regions labeled “blue” or perceived as more inclusive, administrative concerns often overshadow a coach’s desire to recruit a promising talent. Indeed, the intersection of politics, policy, and performance remains a major barrier.
“Trans people are actively getting attacked right now, and our rights are getting stripped away,” Schreiner said. “But we’re not going anywhere. I’m not going anywhere, and I’m sure come this January, you’ll see me again competing on the track.”
All eyes are now on the NCAA to see whether Schreiner’s publicly aired frustrations will prompt any official response. For those within the transgender community and their allies, her story is emblematic of a broader cultural battle—one pitting acceptance and fair play against legislative restrictions and administrative fears. With the next political shift looming, many athletes, advocates, and families wonder if the national conversation will move closer to consensus or grow even more polarized.
Either way, Schreiner appears ready to lace up her spikes and step onto the starting blocks. In a sporting world that is anything but settled on this issue, her determination to compete is an example of the resilience many trans athletes must embody—on and off the track.
