CLASS IS IN SESSION: ANDERS V. CAL. STATE UNIV., FRESNO AND THE DEBATE OVER CLASS CERTIFICATION IN TITLE IX ATHLETICS CASES

The world of college athletics is changing rapidly and dramatically. Conferences are disintegrating and realigning. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the cutting of varsity sport programs at universities around the country. Student-athletes are signing multi- year name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals with major brands such as Gatorade, State Farm, and Nike that are worth millions of dollars. Yet with all of these changes, a college or university receiving federal funds remains obligated to abide by the anti-discrimination requirements of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, widely known as Title IX. Though Title IX has been federal law for over fifty years, the majority of colleges and universities are still failing to comply with its requirements. Accordingly, student-athletes now only have one possible avenue for pursuing claims of Title IX violations against their schools: lengthy and costly lawsuits. However, as demonstrated by the case of Anders v. Cal. State Univ., Fresno, students often face legal roadblocks following this path as well. Using Anders as a case study, this Note examines the current legal debate over class certification in Title IX athletics cases, which often delays and distracts the court from addressing the central issue of whether an institution has violated a student’s federal civil rights to be free from discrimination. In response to the Anders district court’s finding that there is an inherent conflict between members of different women’s sports teams at a university, this Note discusses the legislative history and intent of Title IX, as well as relevant case law, in describing why the court’s finding is antithetical to the purpose of both Title IX and Title IX lawsuits. Lastly, this Note proposes that the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act be amended in order to require institutions to provide more robust reporting around Title IX compliance, which would provide an avenue for the Department of Education to engage in proactive enforcement of Title IX. This proposal will not only allow for greater accountability of institutions in complying with federal law but will also allow Title IX to finally live up to its purpose and close the opportunity gap in college athletics.