For decades, Title IX has been synonymous with students. It is the law that transformed athletics, expanded educational opportunities for women and girls, and became one of the most powerful tools for addressing sexual harassment and sexual violence on college campuses.
But the Supreme Court is now poised to answer a question with enormous consequences:
Can employees at schools and universities sue under Title IX for sex discrimination in employment?
The answer could fundamentally alter the rights of faculty, coaches, administrators, and staff across the country.
The Case Before the Court
The Supreme Court recently agreed to hear Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University of Georgia, consolidating issues raised by former Georgia Tech women’s basketball coach MaChelle Joseph and former Augusta University professor Thomas Crowther.
Joseph alleges that she was terminated after repeatedly raising concerns about inequities between the men’s and women’s basketball programs. Crowther claims he faced discrimination in connection with allegations that ultimately ended his employment.
Both plaintiffs brought claims under Title IX.
The problem? Federal courts are split on whether employees can do that.
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that employees cannot pursue employment discrimination claims under Title IX because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act already provides a remedy. Eight other federal appellate courts have reached the opposite conclusion, allowing employees to bring Title IX claims against educational institutions receiving federal funds.
The Supreme Court will now resolve that conflict once and for all.
Why Does This Matter?
To many people, this may sound like legal technicalities.
It isn’t.
Title VII and Title IX operate very differently.
Under Title VII, employees generally must first file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) before filing suit. There are strict deadlines, administrative exhaustion requirements, and statutory caps on damages.
Title IX, by contrast, has historically allowed individuals to proceed directly into court without first navigating the EEOC process. It also does not impose the same limitations on damages.
If the Court determines that Title IX does provide employees with a private right of action for discrimination claims, educational employees could retain a powerful avenue for seeking justice.
If the Court rules the opposite way, employees in schools, colleges, and universities would largely be limited to Title VII’s procedural framework.
The Impact on Colleges and Universities
Higher education institutions occupy a unique space.
Unlike many traditional employers, colleges and universities have obligations that extend beyond workplace compliance. They are educational environments governed by federal funding requirements, Title IX regulations, Office for Civil Rights guidance, institutional policies, athletics equity obligations, and increasingly complex expectations regarding safety and fairness.
Many of the employees who work in these spaces do not fit neatly into traditional employment models.
Consider:
- Coaches advocating for equal resources between men’s and women’s athletics;
- Faculty reporting sex discrimination affecting students;
- Title IX Coordinators raising concerns about institutional failures;
- Residence life professionals reporting sexual misconduct trends;
- Staff members challenging inequitable treatment tied directly to educational programming.
The distinction between “employee” and “participant in educational programs” often becomes blurred.
A narrow Supreme Court ruling could discourage employees from raising concerns that ultimately protect students.
A broader ruling could reinforce the principle that individuals who work within educational systems deserve robust protections when they speak out against sex discrimination.
What This Means for Survivors and Campus Communities
At Andreozzi + Foote, we have spent years representing survivors harmed by institutions that failed to prevent abuse, ignored warning signs, or prioritized reputation over accountability.
We have also worked in the Title IX space, helping clients navigate some of the most difficult moments of their lives.
One truth consistently emerges:
Institutional accountability often depends on employees who are willing to come forward.
Coaches notice disparities.
Faculty observe concerning conduct.
Administrators identify policy failures.
Staff members report misconduct.
Many of the reforms that have made campuses safer originated because employees chose to speak up, despite enormous personal and professional risk.
The ability of those employees to seek meaningful legal remedies matters.
It matters not only to them, but to the students and survivors whose experiences might otherwise remain hidden.
Title IX Was Never Just About Athletics
When most people hear “Title IX,” they think of sports.
And while Title IX undeniably transformed athletic opportunities for women and girls, its broader promise was simple:
No person should be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under educational programs receiving federal financial assistance because of sex.
That promise has evolved over decades through litigation and advocacy.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education recognized retaliation protections for employees who advocate on behalf of students experiencing sex discrimination. The Court understood that without those protections, enforcement of Title IX would be significantly weakened.
The question now is whether that recognition extends further.
Can employees themselves seek relief when they experience sex discrimination within educational institutions?
The Court’s answer will shape the next chapter of Title IX jurisprudence.
Looking Ahead for Title IX
Regardless of how the Supreme Court ultimately rules, educational institutions should be paying close attention.
This case presents an opportunity for colleges and universities to reflect on their own cultures of accountability:
Do employees feel safe reporting concerns?
Are complaints investigated fairly and promptly?
Are Title IX obligations viewed as compliance checklists, or as commitments to equity and safety?
At Andreozzi + Foote, we believe that protecting survivors and preventing abuse requires systems that encourage transparency, not silence.
Whether someone is a student finding their voice for the first time or an employee risking their career to challenge discrimination, meaningful legal protections matter.
The Supreme Court’s decision won’t just determine where these claims get filed.
It will send a message about who can seek justice when discrimination occurs within the institutions entrusted with educating and protecting the next generation.