Posted on 12/12/2022 7:24:44 PM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider how strictly to interpret the landmark Title IX civil rights law's protections for gender equality in college sports in a lawsuit challenging Michigan State University's elimination of its women's swimming and diving team.
The high court rejected the university's appeal of a lower-court ruling in favor of former members of the team who say MSU violated Title IX by not providing enough opportunities for women athletes to participate in sports.
Lori Bullock, a lawyer for the student athletes suing MSU, said she was "pleased but not surprised" the Supreme Court turned away MSU's appeal. The court's decision helps clear the way for a trial scheduled to begin next month.
"We believe the facts clearly show that Michigan State violated Title IX by eliminating its women's swimming and diving team," she said in a statement. "We look forward to holding the school accountable."
MSU in a statement said it was "disappointed" but accepted the court's decision and would now focus on trial court proceedings.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Just go to 1 unisex college category, may the best pervert win.
>> So a SCOTUS member cannot define what is women, how can any title IX be decided?
Not a matter of “cannot”, but would rather not.
But they can certainly define marriage enough to determine that same-sex couples have a Constitutional right to it.
Schools should not have sports teams to begin with. Its not the place kids should go to to learn how to move a ball from one end of a field. This is why our schools graduate kids who can’t even write in cursive, do simple math, or even read a comic book. Thats why they turn into democrat voters, it requires very little intellegence. All part of the left’s plan.
Women don’t exist anymore, so they can’t have standing.
My guess is MSU is run by democrats, and this is another example of the Dems war on women’s sports.
Well that’s a problem since no major religion sanctions same-sex marriage. So how can SCOTUS affirm behavior that’s neither specified in the Constitution nor sanctioned by any religion?
More a matter of “refused to” - which makes any of her decisions about women’s issues suspect and changeable with political winds.
Funny how those who complain women won’t have enough opportunity to compete are the ones who really worry that men posing as women won’t get to show their superiority over actual women. Anyone who thinks they’re championing women is “confused”.
Here’s a thought… eliminate organized school sports. Period.
You’re making too much sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.