LINKS
PETITIONPlease sign our petition to save dropped OU sports. Click here. If your current circumstances or position with Ohio University do not require anonymity, we request that you sign with your name rather than as "Anonymous" as some have. Thank you and thanks to the Women's Lacrosse blog for setting up this petition.MORE LINKSBobcat Attack Message BoardOhio University Alumni AssociationOU Students have an active discussion going on in FaceBook.Com. Click here to go to FaceBook.Com and join in.OU Student Newspaper "The Post Online"www.EquityinAthletics.orgSave James Madison University Sports.orgTaking Inside Higher Ed to the MatEMAIL CONTACT FOR THIS SITE: SaveOUSports ATgmailDOTcom |
EIA Sues JMU Administration to Stop CutsAdds School, Rose, Bourne, and Visitors as DefendantsJune 7, 2007 -- Roanoke, Virginia -- Equity in Athletics, Inc. ("EIA") announced today that it has filed an amended complaint to include James Madison University ("JMU"), President Linwood Rose, Athletic Director Jeffrey Bourne, and JMU's entire Board of Visitors as defendants in EIA's pending suit against the federal Department of Education's "Three-Part Test."The Department of Education uses its Three-Part Test to determine whether an athletic department complies with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. For schools like JMU, where women outnumber men in the student body, that test requires that (1) athletic participation rates mirror enrollment rates by gender, (2) the school recently added a women's sport, or (3) the school has fully met women's athletic interests, even if it has not fully met men's interest.By contrast, 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 notices and memoranda in 1979, 1996, 2003, and 2005, however, the federal government purports to have created the Three-Part Test, thereby establishing the rival standard of equal participation, based on enrollment. This rival federal standard does not require schools like JMU to assess students' relative interests or even to consider men's interests at all.EIA argues that those post-1975 actions were both procedurally and substantively illegal. Procedurally, the federal government never commenced the rulemaking that federal law would require to amend the 1975 regulations. Although courts in other jurisdictions have relied on the enrollment-based standard, the Fourth Circuit (which includes Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, and the Carolinas) has not ruled on the question for schools within its jurisdiction. And no court in any jurisdiction has considered the merits of EIA's argument that the post-1975 actions purport to change the Title IX standard without the required rulemaking.EIA's amended complaint alleges that the Three-Part Test posed JMU with a dilemma: either elevate equestrian and/or water polo as varsity sports for women (but not for men) to comply with prongs two and three, or cut the athletic department to meet first prong's enrollment quota. Unfortunately, JMU announced on September 29, 2006, that it would cut ten teams (men’s and women’s archery and gymnastics, women’s fencing, and men’s indoor and outdoor track, cross country, wrestling, and swimming) to comply with the first prong. EIA's lawsuit seeks to reinstate all ten teams.EIA argues that JMU faced a false dilemma because its existing athletic program already complied with the interest-based standard, and the proposed cuts violate that standard. By letter dated March 23, 2007, EIA offered JMU the opportunity to avoid litigation while EIA's suit against the federal government determined the lawful Title IX standard for Virginia and the Fourth Circuit. On April 4, 2007, JMU rejected EIA's offer, making a suit against JMU the only option for saving the ten teams and voiding JMU's illegal cuts.In April and May, EIA gathered evidence and worked with students to prepare affidavits to show that the ten JMU teams are ready, willing, and able to compete next year if the court nullifies the cuts scheduled to take effect July 1, 2007. After serving the complaint and summonses on the new defendants this week, EIA plans to ask Judge Glen E. Conrad to issue a preliminary injunction against the cuts.If Judge Conrad upholds the original 1975 regulations' equal-opportunity test over the Three-Part Test, JMU's planned cuts are illegal under Title IX. But regardless of whether agency memoranda somehow amended the Title IX regulations, EIA alleges that JMU's planned cuts also violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In its most recent "clarification" of its Title IX athletics policies, the Department of Education acknowledges that compliance with federal Title IX guidance does not insulate schools from constitutional challenges under the Equal Protection Clause.As a state school, JMU arguably shares Virginia's Eleventh Amendment's immunity from suit in federal court without consent. By accepting federal funds, however, JMU waived any immunity for suits under Title IX. Because that waiver does not apply to suits under the Equal Protection Clause, EIA sued also named JMU's administration as defendants. Under the "officer suit" exception to sovereign immunity, EIA may sue individual JMU officers in federal court to enjoin ongoing violations of federal law.In addition to alleging violation of Title IX and the U.S. Constitution, the amended complaint alleges that JMU's cuts violate the Virginia Human Rights Act and the Due Process Clause of Virginia's constitution. The complaint also alleges that JMU's Board of Visitors planned the illegal cuts in secret meetings that violated the open-meeting provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. In addition to reinstating the teams, the complaint asks the Court to order JMU to hold all future meetings on athletics policies in public and to convene a task force of students, faculty, alumni, and administration before adopting any future cuts in the athletic department.EIA’s counsel are Lawrence J. Joseph (Washington, D.C.), Douglas G. Schneebeck (Albuquerque, New Mexico) and Thomas H. Miller (Roanoke, Virginia). Schneebeck is a graduate of James Madison University, and was the captain of JMU’s 1982 track and field squad. Men’s track is among the sports set for elimination by JMU. Media inquiries should be directed to John Licata (703-925-2021) and Doug Schneebeck (505-848-1869).More information is available at http://www.equityinathletics.org |
DROPPED TEAMS
2006 Women's Lacrosse Team
Women's Save Ohio Lacrosse Blog
LaxPower.com message board discussion on OU LAX
Women's Lacrosse web page at OU website
Swimming and Diving
Save Ohio Swimming and DivingandSave Ohio Swimming
Swimming and Diving web page at OU website
Save Ohio University Swimming Discussion Forum
Track and Field
Bringing Back Ohio Track Blog
Track and Field web page at OU website
YouTube video put together for the Track and Field Team
|
|
Copyright 2007 - 2008 by SaveOUSports.org - Email: SaveOUSports AT gmail DOT comSaveOUsports.org is a non-profit group devoted to action that will reinstate discontinued varsity sports at Ohio University.
|
