Background
Female Athletes United sued Minnesota officials and school boards under Title IX, alleging that allowing a transgender student to compete on a girls’ softball team violated the rights of female athletes. The district court denied a preliminary injunction, ruling that the group lacked a private right of action for its disparate impact claims. The Eighth Circuit reviewed whether the group had standing and whether Title IX permits private suits for disparate impact allegations.
The court’s reasoning
The court affirmed that the plaintiff organization had standing because one member faced a scheduled game against the transgender athlete. However, the court held that Title IX only supplies a private right of action for claims of intentional discrimination. The plaintiff’s claims were based on disparate impact theories, which do not allow for a private suit. The court rejected the argument that federal guidance or awareness of negative impacts established deliberate indifference sufficient to infer intentional discrimination.
What it means going forward
Schools in the Eighth Circuit may continue to allow transgender students to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity without fear of private lawsuits based on disparate impact theories under Title IX.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download