In scathing ruling, judge finds State College Area School District violated Title IX
A federal judge issued a scathing ruling Thursday directing the State College Area School District to take every step to accommodate female students that want to play ice hockey, finding the premier school district in Centre County violated Title IX.
Chief Judge Matthew W. Brann of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania handed a legal victory to the three middle school girls who sued the district in August. He approved their request for a preliminary injunction, an extraordinary remedy granted only in limited circumstances.
The district was ordered to ensure the girls are included on a club team, even if that means sponsoring a second one. The district was also directed to take immediate steps to recruit female students and promote participation in the team.
“The great ice hockey player Wayne Gretzky famously said that ‘(y)ou miss 100% of the shots you don’t take’ “ Brann wrote in his 22-page opinion. “His quote assumes that everyone has the opportunity to play, though, and in this case, the Plaintiffs have not been given the opportunity to, which they are afforded under Title IX.”
The district was reviewing the decision as of Friday afternoon and plans to “evaluate all of its options going forward,” spokesperson Chris Rosenblum wrote in an email.
“We have always strived to comply with Title IX requirements by providing equal opportunities for female students, and we will take the necessary steps to continue fulfilling that commitment,” Rosenblum wrote.
Attorney Aaron Brooks, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of his daughter and two other girls, said Friday he felt “tremendously validated” by the ruling.
“There’s been a lot of victim blaming through the entirety of this. Unfortunately, a lot of parents see youth sports as a zero-sum game,” Brooks said. “... I view youth sports as everyone should be out there being able to participate and play. That’s what the girls want to do. They don’t think that they’re going to go to the NHL because, obviously, they can’t. They just want to go play ice hockey. They love the game.”
The legal maneuvering between the parents and the district — which Brann described as “heated” — was “extremely difficult” for the girls, Brooks said.
When his daughter learned of the ruling, Brooks said she gave him a “huge hug” and said thank you. He paused for nearly 10 seconds Friday after describing her reaction, telling the Centre Daily Times he was “getting a little choked up.”
“It lit up her entire face,” Brooks said.
The facts as alleged involve upset parents, an inflexible school district and a parent-run booster club that “seems particularly adverse to finding a solution to accommodate interested female students,” Brann wrote.
Thirty-four students — including at least four females — attended in April the first round of tryouts for the co-ed, non-checking club team. Only three girls attended the second round of tryouts later that month.
The final roster for the only middle school team was made up of 19 boys; no girls were on the team. The girls’ parents repeatedly asked the district to create a second team, Brann wrote, but were rejected.
The district — via the parent-run booster club — cited a lack of available rink time, ambiguity about where the decision-making authority lies to create a second team and a concern about having more than 19 players on the ice at one time.
Creating a second team would have no adverse financial impact on the district, Brann wrote.
The parents told the district in May they assembled enough players and coaches for a second team, in addition to separate ice time. That offer was also rejected for “no specific reason,” the parents alleged.
Brann agreed with the parents that there is unmet interest in ice hockey in the district. The district argued female students’ interest was met when they were permitted to try out; Brann flatly disagreed.
“Merely allowing female athletes to show up for co-ed tryouts is not enough to satisfy Title IX,” Brann wrote. “... Here, the context and outcome of the tryouts are important. Between two separate tryouts, four female students vied to join the co-ed middle school hockey team. Thirty-four students in total tried out. When the final team was rostered, no female students were on this long list, but nineteen male students made the cut. Based on this outcome and the numbers alone, it is clear that ... the District was willing to create a large single team with many roster slots, but none of those slots were offered to interested females.”
None of the evidence presented indicated the district made any effort to meet the female students’ interest in comparable ways, like allowing them to practice with the team or inviting them to fill alternate spots.
The district expressed a willingness to support the creation of a second team if feasible, but argued it was not possible logistically.
“Be that as it may, the District cannot simultaneously state that it supports creating a second co-ed middle school team that could accommodate the interested female students, while at the same time do nothing when the female students ask for a team to be created,” Brann wrote. “... Ignoring the female students’ stated interest in being accommodated while seeming to relinquish this responsibility to a parent-run booster club is not supportive; it is the opposite.”
A status report outlining the district’s effort to comply with Brann’s directives in due Jan. 15.
“The Court regrets that this matter escalated to the point where judicial intervention and injunctive relief proved necessary,” Brann wrote. “For the sake of the State College community’s well(-)being, the Court encourages all players in this case, literally and figuratively, to consider working together in resolving this matter going forward.”
This story was originally published December 2, 2022 at 10:57 AM.