● The Supreme Court is expected this fall to hear a sex discrimination case brought by a former art professor and women’s basketball coach who both say they were wrongly terminated from their jobs at public universities in Georgia, SCOTUSblog reports. At issue is whether employees can file sex discrimination cases under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination by schools that receive federal funding.
● The plaintiffs are Thomas Crowther, a former Augusta University art professor, and MaChelle Joseph, who coached the women’s basketball team at Georgia Tech for 16 years. Their cases have been consolidated. Crowther claims his contract to teach at Augusta was not renewed after several students accused him of sexual harassment and that he never got an adequate opportunity to dispute the allegations, CNN reports. Joseph argues that she was terminated in 2019 for raising issues about disparities in the resources and facilities the school afforded to the men’s team versus the women’s team, according to CNN.
● The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit had tossed their claims, ruling that Title IX does not confer a private right of action for school employees to file sex discrimination cases against their employers, and that such claims can be brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The bigger picture:
If university employees can bring sex discrimination cases under Title VII, then why do so under Title IX? There are several key differences, including bureaucratic requirements and potential payouts.
Under Title VII, compensatory and punitive damages are capped. Under Title IX, compensatory damages are uncapped, but punitive or emotional distress damages are not allowed. Under Title VII, litigants must first file a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, whereas Title IX has no such requirement.
Reuters notes that Joseph and Crowther argued in their petition that the 11th Circuit ruling “threatened to undermine the uniform nationwide enforcement of Title IX.”
U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer reached a similar conclusion in a brief the Supreme Court asked him to file in the case. “He sided with the university that the court of appeals’ decision was correct, but he contended that because the lower courts are divided on this question, the justices should nonetheless grant the employees’ petition for review,” SCOTUSBlog notes.
