Title IX Research Paper

1807 WordsMay 12, 20048 Pages
In 1972 Congress passed the Educational Amendments. One section of this law, Title IX prohibits discrimination against girls and women in federally funded education, including in athletic programs. Since its arrival, in regards to athletics, there have been arguments for and against the many aspects pertaining to this law. Title IX has had a large impact on high school and college athletics in the attempt to give females an equal opportunity, but the means by which they are achieving this goal is an ongoing debate. The basic Title IX statute provides: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or…show more content…
In fact, OCR is attempting to make it clear that each of the three prongs of the test is an equally sufficient means of complying with Title IX, and no one prong is favored (Reynolds July 11, 2003). The three-prong test also makes it clear that it is not Title IX that is forcing the cut backs in men's sports but those put in a place of decision making at each institution who chose how it is that they want to comply with Title IX's three-prong test. In some cases a schools decision to cut sports in order to comply with Title IX has lead to a lawsuit. An example of this would be Miami University. The university formed a committee to address the issue of Title IX compliance and hired a consultant as well. "The committee and consultant determined that in order to comply with Title IX, the university had the option of eliminating a few sports for men. As a result, the university eliminated the men's soccer, wrestling and tennis teams, effective at the end of the 1999 spring semester (Challenge 2002)." On November 18, 1999, the plaintiffs filed a complaint against the defendants, claming that the defendants' elimination of the men's wrestling, tennis and soccer programs at Miami University, a state university of the State of Ohio and a recipient of federal funds, constituted gender discrimination in violation of the 20 U.S.C.& et seq. And violated their rights to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment (United 2002). The court found that the plaintiffs failed
Open Document