Miami of Ohio sued for Reserve Discrimination over Title IX

Male Athletes Sue University Over Elimination of Teams

'Reverse discrimination' in Title IX interpretation cited

Cleveland, Ohio, November 18, 1999 -- Several male athletes sued Miami University (at Ohio), claiming reverse discrimination that resulted from Title IX, the federal law designed to equalize the money colleges spend on men's and women's sports.

The former Miami University wrestlers, tennis and soccer players contend that by eliminating their teams to satisfy the law's goals, the university violated sex discrimination provisions of Title IX.

A spokesman for the Washington-based Center For Individual Rights, which is representing the male athletes, argued that "prohibiting men from participating in athletics simply because they are men is sex discrimination, and that violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution as well as the federal civil rights statute, Title IX."

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Cincinnati, asks the court to order Miami to reinstate the men's sports and to pay team members unspecified damages "for the losses they've suffered … shattered dreams . . . and costs such as transferring to other universities."

The University said that it determined the only way it could comply with Title IX requirements for women's sports was to cut the funding for men's sports. However, it claims that not only what Miami did was illegal, but that it was also unnecessary because it was already in compliance with Title IX by virtue of having added women's soccer and synchronized ice skating within the past few years.

The Brown Case

The Supreme Court seemingly answered the question in Cohen v. Brown University when it concluded that the elimination of men's teams is not unconstitutional. The U.S. Office of Civil Rights interpreted Title IX to mean that opportunities must be given on a "substantially proportional" basis. To determine this, the amount of scholarship money available for each sex is divided by the number of male or female participants in the athletic program and results are compared. If "substantially equal amounts" of money are spent per athlete, or if a disparity is explained by legitimate and non-discriminatory factors, the Office of Civil Rights will find compliance.