The WNBA and the Women’s National Basketball Players Association still have not said whether the most dominant player in a French women’s professional basketball league would be eligible to play in the WNBA.
Transgender basketball player Julie Tétart, a biological male, plays for Monaco in Ligue Féminine 2 (LF2), France’s second-tier women’s basketball league.
Tétart averaged 21 points and 20 rebounds per game during the 2025-26 season, leading LF2 in both categories.
FRENCH TRANS PHENOM JULIE TÉTART LOOKS WNBA-READY — SO WHY HASN’T THE ‘INCLUSIVE’ LEAGUE CALLED?
Eurobasket.com also named the 34-year-old its All-French LF2 Player of the Year, Defensive Player of the Year and Domestic Player of the Year.
Those numbers certainly sound WNBA-worthy.
Plus, Tétart told OutKick/Fox News Digital that playing in the WNBA is "a childhood dream" and said, "If they contact me, I won’t say no."
So, OutKick/Fox News Digital asked the WNBA and the Women’s National Basketball Players Association a simple question: Would Julie Tétart be eligible to play in the league?
Neither organization responded to the initial inquiries or a subsequent follow-up specifically addressing Tétart’s eligibility under the collective bargaining agreement.
The question shouldn’t be difficult. After all, the league’s newly signed CBA appears to provide a clear eligibility standard.
Article XIII, Section 1(a) states: "Only players who are women are eligible to play in the WNBA."
Sounds simple, right?
But as OutKick/Fox News Digital previously reported, the 409-page agreement never defines "woman" or "women." The terms "transgender" and "gender identity" don’t appear anywhere in the document.
The CBA contains detailed definitions for dozens of other terms. Yet the agreement doesn’t define the word that determines who may play in the league.
That omission was already notable when Indiana Fever star Caitlin Clark said leagues and governing bodies should work with athletes to determine who should be included in women’s sports.
OutKick/Fox News Digital previously sought clarification about the standard after Clark’s comments.
At that point, the league could treat the question as theoretical.
It isn’t theoretical anymore.
Tétart gives the WNBA a concrete case: a professional player in a women’s league who led LF2 in scoring and rebounding and has publicly expressed interest in the WNBA.
Would the WNBA consider Tétart a "woman" for purposes of Article XIII?
Would eligibility be determined by biological sex, gender identity, hormone levels or some other standard?
The CBA doesn’t say, leaving the league’s eligibility standard unclear.
The question is separate from age, draft and international-player eligibility provisions, which the CBA addresses in detail.
The WNBA has repeatedly presented itself as an inclusive, progressive sports league. But "inclusion" doesn’t answer the basic question: What is a woman, according to the WNBA and the WNBPA?
Either Tétart is eligible or Tétart isn’t.
If Tétart is eligible, the league should explain the standard and how that standard protects fairness for female players.
If Tétart isn’t eligible, the league should identify the rule or policy that makes a biological male ineligible. The CBA’s current language doesn’t provide that clarity publicly.
This isn’t a request for the WNBA to comment on an abstract political debate. It’s a request for the league to apply its own eligibility rule to a specific professional basketball player.
The same applies to the WNBPA. The union agreed to language stating that only women may play in the league, so players deserve to know how that language would apply to a biological male currently dominating a women’s league.
A professional player has publicly expressed interest in a WNBA opportunity.
The league has a rule that supposedly determines whether that opportunity is possible.
But when asked whether Julie Tétart qualifies under that rule, the WNBA and WNBPA had nothing to say.
