Neena Chaudhry, Senior Counsel and Director of Equal Opportunities in Athletics

by Neena Chaudhry, Senior Counsel
National Women’s Law Center

A federal appellate court recently defended Title IX from yet another attack by male athletes who are upset about losing their teams. The men claimed that James Madison University discriminated against them in violation of Title IX and the U.S. Constitution by cutting seven men’s teams and three women’s teams – even though similar claims have been rejected by courts throughout the country. If you’re thinking that it doesn’t make sense to claim discrimination against men when women’s teams were also cut, you’re not alone. 

But this case is not really about logic. Rather, it is one in a series of attempts to ignore the truth and scapegoat Title IX for the loss of teams. The truth is that Title IX does not require or encourage schools to cut teams; it simply demands that schools treat males and females equally, surely something we can agree on. The truth is that schools decide how many and which teams to field based on a variety of factors, including interest, finances, and competitiveness. In this case, JMU admitted that it wanted to make its athletics program leaner and meaner. And the truth is that some schools have chosen to eliminate certain men’s sports, like gymnastics and wrestling, and even some women’s sports, rather than control bloated football and basketball budgets, which consume a whopping 74 percent of the average Division I-A school’s total men’s athletic operating budget. For example, San Diego State University decided to address its $2 million budget deficit by cutting its men’s volleyball team instead of cutting slightly into the $5 million football budget.