Title IX is a statute that many people associate with protections for the students of educational institutions and other recipients of federal funds. Since the aim of the statute is to end and prevent discrimination on the basis of sex, Title IX also protects employees of educational institutions as well. Does this mean that employees of entities covered by Title IX can file a lawsuit seeking money damages? This is what the Supreme Court will decide next.
In Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the Eleventh Circuit held that no private right of action existed for employees to seek damages for alleged violations of Title IX. Although the Eleventh Circuit did not deny that employees were within the class of people potentially protected by Title IX, it determined that no implied private right of action existed for employees to sue for damages for such violations. The Court distinguished the claims of employees from those of students for whom an implied private right of action has been clearly established to exist. The Court also noted that, because Title IX was passed under Congress’s Spending Clause authority, Title IX did not provide sufficient notice to educational institutions and recipients of federal funds that they would be liable for damages claims from employees.
The Crowther case was decided by the 11th Circuit, and its holding is arguably inconsistent with the holdings of other federal circuits on this issue. In particular, the Sixth Circuit, which encompasses Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, and Tennessee, has previously taken a more expansive approach to implied private rights of action under Title IX. In Snyder-Hill v. Ohio State University, 48 F.4th 686, 707–09 (6th Cir. 2022), the Sixth Circuit held that visiting students and contract employees may sue for damages under Title IX. Though the issue was not explicitly decided there, this suggests that regular employees would also enjoy the right to sue for damages under Title IX. This contradiction, though, is precisely why the Supreme Court has taken up the issue. Because the Eleventh Circuit’s decision now represents a split in the federal circuits, the Solicitor General filed a brief with the Supreme Court urging the Court to take up the case but affirm the Eleventh Circuit in finding that no private right of action exists for employees to sue for damages under Title IX.
Of course, employees of educational institutions and other entities are already protected from sex discrimination by other federal and state statutes, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Unlike Title IX, however, Title VII is subject to a stricter statute of limitations and damages caps. Similar limitations exist under many state civil rights acts relating to employment as well. Because Title IX does not contain these same limitations, the Supreme Court’s decision in Crowther could have a strategic impact on employment claims going forward. The Supreme Court’s decision could either limit or expand potential employment liability for educational institutions and other entities covered by Title IX. For this reason, educational institutions, school officials and administrators, and other recipients of federal funding should monitor the result in Crowther to see whether a potential new defense may exist for employment claims asserted under Title IX.
[View source.]
