Federal judge rejects UO beach volleyball, rowing Title IX Class Action Certification, athletes seek appeal

A federal judge denied members of the University of Oregon’s beach volleyball and club rowing teams class action status in a Title IX lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Michael McShane ruled the athletes failed to prove their experiences were typical for all female athletes at the university, according to court documents.

Why was class action status denied for the athletes?

Judge McShane ruled that beach volleyball players did not demonstrate that their experiences represented those of all female athletes at UO. He noted the program began in 2013 and involves specific issues, including a lack of a full-time coach and the requirement to practice off campus.

McShane wrote that because beach volleyball is an “emerging” varsity sport, the plaintiffs must address if that status influences their Title IX claim. He excluded the rowing team from the class action because he found they lacked the ability to participate in varsity athletics.

The judge stated the rowing team’s recorded race times were “substantially inferior” to the worst performing Division I rowing teams. Consequently, he ruled they were not being deprived of varsity opportunities.

Did You Know? The University of Oregon beach volleyball program first came online in 2013.

What claims are the athletes making against the university?

In a lawsuit filed in 2023, the athletes alleged they were deprived of appropriate facilities and scholarships. They further argued that women’s sports across the university receive fewer resources than men’s sports.

Attorney Arthur Bryant told KLCC that the ruling contradicts established Title IX practices. Bryant argued that athletes do not need to prove their talent level to seek equal opportunities to participate in varsity athletics.

Another attorney, Matthew Murray, claimed Judge McShane erred in his analysis and ignored certain evidence. Murray specifically argued that the race times the judge used to dismiss the rowers were “cherry picked” and irrelevant to the claim.

Expert Insight: Samantha Carter notes that this case highlights a significant legal tension between the requirement of athletic merit and the mandate for equal opportunity under Title IX. If the court maintains that “ability” is a prerequisite for claiming discrimination, it could limit the scope of how gender parity is measured in collegiate sports.

How has the University of Oregon responded?

The University of Oregon has consistently denied all allegations of discrimination. The university stated it is currently making progress on an on-campus facility for beach volleyball.

Title IX Lawsuit Against University of Oregon: Shocking Allegations of Inequality in Athletics

What happens next in the legal case?

The athletes asked the Court of Appeals for a review on Thursday. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit will now determine if the athletes may appeal the judge’s decision.

The University of Oregon may weigh in on the potential appeal over the next few weeks. A decision by the 9th Circuit could potentially reinstate the class action status or uphold Judge McShane’s ruling.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the judge exclude the rowing team from the class action?
Judge McShane ruled that the rowing team’s race times were substantially inferior to the worst performing Division I teams, meaning they were not deprived of the opportunity to participate in varsity athletics.

What specific issues did the beach volleyball players allege?
The players alleged they lacked a full-time coach and were forced to practice off campus.

Who will decide if the case can be appealed?
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit will determine whether to allow the athletes to appeal.

Do you believe athletic ability should be a factor in Title IX opportunity claims?