Justices Weigh Gender Equity Law (Title 9 enforcement)

[papau]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scotus1dec01.story
THE NATION
Justices Weigh Gender Equity Law
The question is whether coaches and teachers who think girls aren't getting equal treatment can sue to enforce antidiscrimination laws.
By David G. Savage
Times Staff Writer

December 1, 2004

WASHINGTON — The landmark gender equity law known as Title IX, which touched off a revolution in women's sports, came before the Supreme Court on Tuesday as the justices debated whether to protect coaches and teachers who complain that their schools or colleges fail to give girls equal treatment.

Until recently, the answer would have been obvious: After Congress passed the civil rights laws of the 1960s and 1970s, the high court said victims of discrimination and their defenders could sue in court to enforce those laws.

But three years ago, a more conservative court changed course and said it would no longer assume that victims and others could sue to enforce a federal law unless Congress clearly gave them that right.

The 5-4 ruling in that case narrowed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and threw out a lawsuit brought by Alabama's Spanish-speaking residents who complained that the state driver's exam was in English only.

Relying on the newly announced, stricter approach, a federal judge in Alabama threw out a lawsuit brought by a Birmingham girls' basketball coach who was stripped of his duties in May 2001 after he complained his team received less funding and was provided poorer equipment and facilities than the boys' team.

The coach, Roderick Jackson, sued the school district under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which says no person in a school or college that receives federal funds may "be subjected to discrimination … on the basis of sex." This one-sentence decree forced universities, colleges and high schools to offer a full sports program for women, many for the first time.

But as the federal judge in Birmingham and the U.S. court of appeals in Atlanta pointed out, the law did not specifically say victims of sex discrimination could sue in court.

Instead, it said they could complain to the U.S. Department of Education in Washington and its Office for Civil Rights. This agency in turn could cut off federal funds to the school or college if it continued to violate Title IX.

The high court took up the case of Jackson vs. Birmingham Board of Education to decide whether to maintain its long-standing liberal approach to enforcing Title IX or to adopt its newer, more conservative approach that shuns lawsuits. <snip>

[bobbieinok]

1. LATimes had a long article on the Spanish language decision

As I recall, they quoted gleeful conservative lawyers ready to take on Title IX and other discrimination situations.

I complained to my local paper that they had not discussed this. The 'weak' response was that they print AP stories 'as is'. LATimes was the paper's remarks/research on the basic AP story.

This was really a 'handwriting on the wall' story; it was very upsetting that no one else was getting upset.

(link to LATimes story of the time was on DU; very few at DU seemed particularly concerned...as I recall)

[wildeyed]

2. So now we can't sue, we can only complain?

Instead, it said they could complain to the U.S. Department of Education in Washington and its Office for Civil Rights. This agency in turn could cut off federal funds to the school or college if it continued to violate Title IX.

Gee, I am so comforted. I am sure they will do a fabulous job protecting my daughter's rights, just like the EPA is really enforcing those environmental laws. /end sarcasm

I don't understand how a guy can point out that laws are being broken, get fired for it and then be told he doesn't have the right to sue.

[Fire]

3. ugh, I hate this too

It's called the patriarchy. I don't think repukes like the idea of women being encouraged to play sports because its harder to enforce gender norms.