Athletics & title IX of the 1972 education amendments

• Author: Kelsey Henderson, Ida Adibi, Emma D'Arpino, Lillian Tianyi Pang, Sophie Rebeil, Arielle Schechtman, and Elan Wilkenfeld
• Pages: 135-177

ATHLETICS & TITLE IX OF THE 1972 EDUCATION

AMENDMENTS

EDITED BY KELSEY HENDERSON, IDA ADIBI, EMMA D’ARPINO,

LILLIAN TIANYI PANG, SOPHIE REBEIL, ARIELLE SCHECHTMAN, AND

ELAN WILKENFELD

I. INTRODUCTION ..... ..................................... 136

II. DEVELOPMENT OF TITLE IX ................................ 137

A. HISTORY OF TITLE IX ................................ 137

B. NON-ATHLETIC APPLICATIONS OF TITLE IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

1. Sexual Harassment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

2. Employment Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

III. SUITS UNDER TITLE IX ................................... 147

A. BASIC FRAMEWORK .................................. 148

1. Participation Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

2. Qualification as a Sport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

3. Scholarships, Treatment, and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154

B. INCREASED OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARTICIPATION IN TEAM SPORTS . . . 155

C. DISCRIMINATION AGAINST TRANSGENDER STUDENT-ATHLETES . . . . 156

D. DISCRIMINATION AGAINST COACHES AND OTHER ATHLETIC

OFFICIALS ......................................... 159

E. BOOSTER CLUBS, PRIVATE SPONSORSHIP, AND REVENUE-PRODUCING

SPORTS ........................................... 160

F. RETALIATION AGAINST WHISTLEBLOWERS . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

1. Jackson v. Birmingham in the Lower Courts . . . . .. . . . . . 162

2. Jackson in the Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162

3. The Impact of Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

G. ALTERNATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS .................... 164

IV. TITLE IX ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

A. THE GOVERNMENT’S ROLE IN ADMINISTERING TITLE IX . . . . . . . . 165

1. Remedies Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

2. Recent Administrative Developments . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 166

B. PRIVATE CAUSES OF ACTION ............................ 168

1. Parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

a. Proper Plaintiffs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

b. Proper Defendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

2. Remedies in a Private Cause of Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

a. Injunctive and Declaratory Relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

b. Compensatory Damages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

c. Punitive Damages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

d. Equitable Relief . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

135

e. Attorneys’ Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

f. Preemption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174

V. STATE LAW ........................................... 174

VI. CONCLUSION ........................................... 176

I. INTRODUCTION

Congress passed Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments (“Title IX” or

“the Act”) to end sex-based discrimination in education.

1

Title IX states “[no]

person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participa-

tion in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any edu-

cation program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance .. . .”

2

The Act is most widely known for its application to sports, specifically in

expanding opportunities for female athletes. While the Act never explicitly

addresses athletics, prior to the passage of the Act, athletics were recognized as a

part of the educational process and subject to the Equal Protection Clause of the

Fourteenth Amendment.

3

Not only does Title IX apply to athletics issues, but

it also applies in situations involving sexual harassment and employment

discrimination.

Title IX has greatly impacted female participation in athletics. The number of

female high school athletes has increased from less than 300,000 in 1972 to

nearly 3.5 million in the 2018–2019 school year.

4

Maya Riser-Kositsky & Holly Peele, Statistics on School Sports: How Many Students Play Sports?

Which Sports Do They Play?, EDUCATIONWEEK (July 30, 2021), https://www.edweek.org/leadership/

statistics-on-school-sports-how-many-students-play-sports-which-sports-do-they-play/2021/07.

At the collegiate level, six

times more women compete in athletics now than before the Act was passed.

5

Sarah Pruitt, How Title IX Transformed Women’s Sports, HISTORY (June 11, 2021), https://www.

history.com/news/title-nine-womens-sports.

While progress has been made in the world of female athletics, the playing field

is still not entirely level, and Title IX continues to play an important role in guard-

ing against discrimination.

Title IX’s protections have grown beyond discrimination against women. No

transgender student athlete has brought a case thus far, and whether they may have

a successful claim is speculative. However, scholars have articulated a legal theory

under which a transgender student athlete could validly sue the NCAA under a

theory of sex-discrimination.

6

The Biden administration has largely withdrawn

federal guidelines deeming transgender athletes’ participation a Title IX violation.

Nevertheless, such lawsuits may be imminent in the aftermath of the Bostock deci-

sion and discriminatory laws being passed across the country on the state level.

1. See 20 U.S.C. § 1681.

2. 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a).

3. See Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1, 18 (1971).

4.

5.

6. See infra Section III.C.

136 THE GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF GENDER AND THE LAW [Vol. XXIII:135

This article describes the history and framework of Title IX legislation in the

context of high school and intercollegiate athletics. First, this article explores

common issues in athletics litigation, including claims regarding increased partic-

ipation opportunities, competition on teams of the opposite sex, sexual harass-

ment, discrimination against athletics coaches, and private sponsorship and

funding of school athletic teams. Next, the article discusses Jackson v.

Birmingham Board of Education,

7

the most recent Supreme Court case concern-

ing Title IX in athletics, as well as the implications of the Court’s decision in

Bostock v. Clayton County on how courts will interpret the definition of “sex” in

Title IX moving forward.

8

A discussion on the administration and enforcement of

Title IX, including the available remedies and alternatives to litigation, follows.

Finally, this article covers how state laws have moved to ban transgender athletes

from competing.

II. DEVELOPMENT OF TITLE IX

A. HISTORY OF TITLE IX

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits the use of federal

funds to support sexually discriminatory practices in educational programs and

provides citizens with administrative and judicial relief from such discriminatory

practices.

9

Congress enacted Title IX in response to evidence of discrimination

against women within the realm of educational opportunities.

10

Policy, legislation, and judicial interpretation shaped the development of Title

IX. The Office of Civil Rights (“OCR”) in the U.S. Department of Education is

primarily responsible for administering Title IX. OCR regulations concerning

athletics opportunities are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations and pre-

clude sex-based discrimination in athletics.

11

Beyond these regulations, OCR

issues additional policy interpretations to more precisely define schools’ account-

ability under Title IX.

12

See generally A Policy Interpretation: Title IX and Intercollegiate Athletics, 44 Fed. Reg. 71413,

71414 (Dec. 11, 1979), https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9interp.html [hereinafter Policy

Interpretation]; Clarification Of Intercollegiate Athletics Policy Guidance: The Three-Part Test, U.S.

DEP’T OF EDUC. (Jan. 16, 1996), https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/clarific.html#two

[hereinafter Three-Part Test]; Valerie M. Bonnette & Lamar Daniel, Title IX Athletics Investigator’s

Manual, OFF. FOR C.R., U.S. DEP’T OF EDUC. (1990), https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED400763.pdf

[hereinafter Investigator’s Manual].

These regulations and policy interpretations also provide

7. Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. of Educ., 544 U.S. 167 (2005).

8. Bostock v. Clayton Cnty., 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020).

9. 20 U.S.C. §§ 1682–83.

10. See N. Haven Bd. of Educ. v. Bell, 456 U.S. 512, 523 n.13 (1982) (citing 118 Cong. Rec. 5804

(statement of Sen. Evan Bayh)); Cohen v. Brown Univ. (Cohen IV), 101 F.3d 155, 165 (1st Cir. 1996)

(referring to “extensive hearings held in 1970 by the House Special Subcommittee on Education”).

11. See, e.g., 34 C.F.R. § 106.41(a) (2018) (“No person shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from

participation in, be denied the benefits of, be treated differently from another person or otherwise be

discriminated against in any interscholastic, intercollegiate, club or intramural athletics offered by a

recipient, and no recipient shall provide any such athletics separately on such basis.”).

12.

2022] ATHLETICS & TITLE IX 137