|
|
|
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE EIA Asks OU to Postpone CutsBoard of Trustees Scheduled to Meet on April 19, 2007April 18, 2007 -- Roanoke, Virginia -- Equity in Athletics, Inc. ("EIA") announced today its Great Lakes Chapter formally has asked Ohio University ("OU") to postpone its plans to eliminate its men's track, men's swimming, and women's lacrosse teams. OU's Board of Trustees has a previously scheduled meeting on April 19, 2007. In its letter to OU dated April 17, 2007, EIA cites its lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia and its Great Lakes Chapter's intent to file a similar lawsuit over the OU cuts. "Sadly, schools across the country are making the same misguided, unnecessary, and illegal decisions to cut men's teams and small-roster women's teams based on the wrong test for compliance with Title IX," said EIA's President John Licata. In both Virginia and Ohio, EIA argues that the 1975 Title IX regulations create an equal-opportunity standard, based on interest, with schools' having the obligation to assess the interest of both genders. In a series of actions in 1979, 1996, 2003, and 2005, however, the federal government has created a rival standard of equal participation, based on enrollment. EIA argues that the post-1975 actions were both procedurally and substantively illegal. Under EIA's interpretation of the Title IX regulations, OU's planned cuts are illegal, and OU's current alignment of teams complies with Title IX. EIA's letter puts OU on notice that its planned cuts violate Title IX and the U.S. Constitution and asks OU to postpone the cuts to allow EIA's litigation to resolve the appropriate standard for schools' athletic compliance in the Sixth Circuit. As a state school, OU must comply not only with Title IX, but also with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (The Sixth Circuit includes Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee.) The U.S. Supreme Court's recently decided to leave in place the Sixth Circuit's decision in Communities for Equity v. Michigan High School Athletic Association ("MHSAA"). Under MHSAA, EIA can sue OU not only under Title IX, but also under the Equal Protection Clause. Even if Title IX authorizes the federal government's enrollment-based quota, the Constitution clearly does not. In its 2003 decisions on the University of Michigan's admissions policies, the Supreme Court unambiguously held that "outright… balancing [] is patently unconstitutional." "Several press accounts have compared EIA's Virginia litigation with a previous suit filed by the National Wrestling Coaches Association in the District of Columbia," said Larry Joseph, one of EIA's attorneys. "The DC Circuit did not reach the merits of NWCA's Title IX dispute. Instead, the court dismissed the NWCA litigation because the plaintiffs there did not establish that independent parties not before the court -- meaning schools -- would change their behavior if NWCA won against the Department of Education," said Joseph. "Both in Virginia and in Ohio, the key difference is that the school either will commit to postpone the cuts during EIA's litigation against the federal government, or the school will not be an independent party not before the court," he added. Media inquiries should be directed to John Licata (703-925-2021) and Larry Joseph (202-669-5135). More information is available at http://www.equityinathletics.org For More Information Contact: |
Send website comments to web@equityinathletics.org. Copyright 2008 (pictograms used by permission) |