WNBA Commissioner Tells House Republicans Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White Are Ineligible Because They Are 'Both Men'

WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert has put it in writing: Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White cannot play in the league because they are men.

"With respect to your questions regarding eligibility, only women are eligible to play in the WNBA and the individuals you cite in your letter are both men," Engelbert wrote in a letter dated Oct. 16.

The letter answered a Sept. 17 inquiry from Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., and four other House Republicans. They asked about eligibility, player safety and confrontations with fans.

What lawmakers asked

Freedom and White, both former NBA players, announced plans to enter the 2027 WNBA Draft while saying they identify as women. The league deemed both ineligible.

The lawmakers wanted two things. They asked how the WNBA defines "women" under Article XIII, Section 1(a) of its collective bargaining agreement, and why the two men had been ruled out.

That provision of the 2026 agreement reads: "Only players who are women are eligible to play in the WNBA." The eligibility provision does not define the word.

Engelbert's letter did not supply a definition. It also did not announce a new eligibility rule or lay out a broader policy on transgender athletes. The America First Policy Institute, which represents Freedom, provided the letter to OutKick.

Reaction from Stutzman and Freedom

Stutzman read the response as a concession on biology.

"The WNBA has just taken the first step in defining what a woman is for the sports community," he said in a statement. "By clearly labeling Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White as men they have acknowledged that identifying as a woman does not change basic human biology."

That is Stutzman's reading. The letter itself states a conclusion about two individuals and does not set out a general definition.

Freedom, who is Turkish-American and a human rights activist, goes after exactly that gap.

"Cathy Engelbert cannot clearly define what a woman is, but she's absolutely certain that I'm a man," Freedom told OutKick. "I mean, how does that make sense? Who gets to decide? Who has the authority to determine whether someone is a woman?"

He added: "So if the league is still working through these questions, how can its commissioner be so certain about my eligibility without explaining the standards that she's applying?"

Freedom's complaint is about process. He is arguing the league made a call without publishing the test behind it.

The league's position

The WNBA's stated position is short. The collective bargaining agreement limits eligibility to women, and Engelbert says neither man qualifies. She gave Congress no further reasoning in the letter.

That position is consistent with the contract's plain text, which restricts play to women. The sticking point for Freedom and the lawmakers is that the contract never says what a woman is for eligibility purposes, and the commissioner did not fill that in.

For a league whose eligibility line is a single sentence, that is a real gap. A rule that rests on an undefined term invites exactly this kind of dispute, whichever side of it you stand on. Most people would say the answer is obvious. The league has still chosen not to write it down.

What remains open

Stutzman and the four other House Republicans have not said whether they will press for a written definition or take further steps. The WNBA has not said whether it plans to amend the collective bargaining agreement or publish eligibility criteria. The league has also not said what standard it applied to Freedom and White.

Freedom has not said whether he will challenge the ruling beyond his public criticism. Whether the league defines the term in writing before the 2027 Draft is the open question.