Fresno State Title IX Lacrosse Suit Revives Class Push on Appeal
A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that six former Fresno State women's lacrosse players suing the school for Title IX sex discrimination were not implicitly biased against the interests of its other female athletes.
The decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a district court judge's order denying class certification in the case based, in part, on the argument that the plaintiffs would favor the school's former lacrosse program over its existing female varsity sports.
The appellate court took the lower court to task for having "abused its discretion" in speculating that there was a conflict that precluded certification of multi-sport classes. The lawsuit was originally filed in February 2021, following Fresno State's decision to cut its women's lacrosse and men's and women's wrestling teams. The school said the programs' cancellations owed to austerity measures forced upon it by the COVID-19 pandemic and state budget cuts.
"[N]eutrality on the part of the proposed class representatives would deprive student-athletes [including lacrosse players] of their due process right to vigorous and single-minded advocacy specific to their respective sport," District Court Judge Anthony W. Ishii wrote in his November 2022 order, denying the plaintiffs' renewed order for class certification.
A senior district judge at the time, Ishii has since retired from the bench. Nevertheless, his ruling effectively stalled the case while the plaintiffs sought immediate review from the Ninth Circuit. They argued that if Ishii's ruling were to stand, it would effectively be the end of federal gender discrimination lawsuits by athletes.
"This holding, unprecedented in U.S. legal history, is inconsistent with Title IX…and this Court's precedents about speculative remedy-stage conflicts," the plaintiffs wrote in their appellate brief. "Indeed, the district court's sua sponte constitutional holding is so contrary to the law that, when given the chance, Fresno State did not even attempt to defend it."
A group of 18 civil rights organizations around the country wrote an amici curiae brief in support of the lacrosse players.
"If attorneys are not automatically disqualified where actual conflicts exist in class actions," the brief stated, "young women who seek to represent and protect other women's rights, as they seek to vindicate their own, should not be disqualified based on speculative conflicts."
The Ninth Circuit agreed, saying the district court "clearly erred" in its decision.
With the Ninth Circuit's ruling, the matter will now be remanded back to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, where the presiding judge, Jennifer L. Thurston, will now decide on whether to certify a class.
"The district court held that women on one team could not constitutionally represent women on other teams," the plaintiffs' lead lawyer, Arthur Bryant, said in a statement. "The Ninth Circuit's ruling makes clear that isn't so."
The Fresno State case is one of several Title IX lawsuits Bryant has brought against schools over the alleged sex discrimination of their athletic departments. Last month, he filed suit against Oregon on behalf of women's beach volleyball players over the disparity of NIL opportunities between male and female athletes on campus.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I need to approve