A federal appeals court in Washington, DC on Friday dismissed a lawsuit alleging that Title IX, the landmark law prohibiting sex discrimination in federally funded education, threatens collegiate male sports teams. In the suit, the National Wrestling Coaches Association (NWCA) claimed that Title IX directly caused discriminatory reductions in men's sports when schools sought to create equal athletic opportunities for women. The three-judge panel said the parties lacked standing to file the lawsuit, which it said should be litigated against the colleges that eliminated men's sports and not the federal government, according to the Associated Press.
“Title IX’s athletic policies are about basic fairness – schools must give women and girls an equal chance to play sports and must treat men and women equally,” said National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) Senior Counsel Neena Chaudhry, who presented the oral argument in front of the US district court which previously heard the case. “While victories like this are steps in the right direction, too many women and girls still do not get the equal opportunities and benefits the law promises them… It’s time to put this fight to rest. The wrestlers have lost in every Court of Appeals that has considered their misguided argument that Title IX results in cuts to men’s teams,” said Chaudhry.
According to NWLC, 72 percent of colleges and universities have added women’s athletic teams to their offerings without eliminating any men’s teams. “Wrestlers should stop trying to pin the blame on female athletes and take on the real culprits – schools’ refusal to support both men’s and women’s teams and to cut bloated budgets,” said Chaudhry. According to the NWLC, women in Division I colleges are over half of the student body, but receive only 43 percent of athletic scholarship dollars, 32 percent of recruiting dollars, and 36 percent of operating budgets.
Mike Moyer, executive director of the NWCA, vowed that his group would appeal to the full appeals court, reports AP.
10/31/2014 Federal Judge Exempts Another Catholic University from Birth Control Coverage - A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Ave Maria University, a Catholic university in Florida, does not have to comply with federal rules meant to ensure that covered employees can exercise their right to obtain birth control at no cost.
The Affordable Care Act requires all new health insurance plans to cover all FDA-approved contraceptives - such as the pill, emergency contraceptives, and IUDs - without charging co-pays, deductibles or co-insurance. . . .
10/31/2014 Women of Color in Tennessee Are United in Opposition to Amendment 1 - Just days before the general election in Tennessee, a coalition of community leaders, clergy, and advocates led a press conference encouraging women of color to vote no on Amendment 1, a dangerous and far-reaching measure on the state's ballot.
SisterReach, a grassroots organization focused on "empowering, organizing, and mobilizing women and girls in the community around their reproductive and sexual health to make informed decisions about themselves," organized the press conference "to call attention to the unique concerns Black and poor communities throughout Shelby County and across the state of Tennessee face on a daily basis" and to emphasize how the upcoming election "could further limit [black women's] reproductive, economic, political, and social autonomy."
"We assemble today to impress upon black women and women of color, many of whom are heads of households, to get out and vote," said SisterReacher Founder and CEO Cherisse Scott at the event.
SisterReach has been educating voters about the particularly dangerous impact of Amendment 1 on women of color. . . .
10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1.
The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .