Inequitable by Design: Framing, Marxist Feminism, and Objections to House v. NCAA

As a response to the potential settlement of House v. NCAA , 12 formal objection letters were filed by female athletes and advocates contesting the settlement’s issues pertaining to gender inequity and Title IX compliance. Despite these efforts, the settlement was approved in June 2025. Therefore, the purpose of this critical discourse analysis was to assess how objections to the House settlement were framed, through the lens of frame alignment and Marxist feminism. Findings revealed that objectors used discourse and framing as a form of feminist resistance, contesting dominant capitalist-patriarchal power structures embedded within college sport. More specifically, objectors framed House as a fairness and morality issue that regresses gender equity, linking historical gendered struggles within collegiate sport with today’s inequities. Through these letters, objectors also described how House impacts other athletes from non-revenue sports, situating inequities in larger systems of unfairness, such as intraclass conflicts between athletes. However, objections were largely reformist, arguing for equity within the same collegiate sport structures that produced such marginalization. Thus, findings provide several implications, including calls for more critical and intersectional strategies for future resistance efforts. This study also offers extensions of frame alignment and Marxist feminism to sport communication scholarship.