1. GENDER DISCRIMINATION (Part I: Resources)

2. Background Dramatic effect Title IX’s significance –Defeat of Tower Amendment –Amplified by regulations

3. Distinguish effect at D-IA schools and all the rest at time of Title IX, funding for ♂’s non- revenue sports significantly exceeded women’s funding for many schools today, key in HS and DIII is whether sports offerings “effectively accommodate the interests and ability” of male and female students who are already enrolled at the institution In contrast, in DI, q is which male or female athletes should be recruited and financially support to attend a university

4. Pre-Title IX: Blair Should it be a defense to a claim under these state provisions that a state university provides the same subsidies for men’s non-revenue sports as women’s non-revenue sports? Suppose Blair rejected WSU’s argument, and required expenses to be equalized regardless of sports?

5. Title IX’s 3-prong test 1> Are participation opportunities provided in numbers substantially proportionate to respective enrollments? 2> Can U show a history and continuing practice of program expansion? 3> When one sex is underrepresented, can U show “the interests and abilities of the members of that sex [has] been fully and effectively accommodated?"

6. Evaluating the text Why should enrollment be the test? Bottom line: can’t meet OCR guidelines, offer football, and provide both men’s and women’s teams in other sports

7. Prong #3: Interest of students prong’s focus on secondary and DIII schools w/ few recruited athletes is that U need not “rain money on otherwise disinterested students” even at Brown, can’t base D-I offerings on “student interests in athletics” [937] b/c students who can play varsity were recruited, and if Brown didn’t have sport, would go elsewhere Yuracko [968-9]: goal is social transformation to encourage girls to develop socially valued traits associated w/ competitive athletics

8. Where to cut? Is it fair to offer more non-football opportunities to female athletes? Legally, does cutting men’s sports violate Title IX? The Equal Protection Clause? What should a school needing to cut back on athletics be permitted to do?

9. The “Mythical Title XI” - §1: where resources and enrollment permit, any boy has the right to participate infootball - §2: subject to resource constraints, all boys preferring other sports that American boys typically play should have a comparable an opportunity as possible compared to their football-playing fellow students

10. Reform Proposals Modest – reduce D-I football scholarship totals from 85 to 55, making them equivalency Radical –abolish all D-I men’s sports that don’t make money –provide for sufficient women’s sports to equal men’s scholarship –typical school would keep football and men’s basketball (68 male scholarships) and about 5 women’s sports