Title IX of The Educational Amendments of 1972
20 U.S.C. ß 1681 et seq.
|Signed into law
by President Richard Nixon, June 23, 1972. Prohibits sex
discrimination in any education program or activity, within
an institution receiving any type of Federal financial
||“Tower Amendment” proposed
||May 20, 1974, Senator Tower
introduced an amendment to exempt revenue-producing sports
from being tabulated when determining Title IX compliance.
The amendment was rejected.
||“Javits Amendment” enacted & included
in the Education Amendments
||July 1974, Senator Javits proposed,
in lieu of proposed Tower Amendment, a proposal stating
HEW must issue Title IX regulation including “with
respect to intercollegiate athletic activities, reasonable
provisions considering the nature of particular sports.” (e.g.,
event-management needs, etc.)
|1975 & 1977
||Two bills attempt to alter
Title IX coverage in athletics; both die in committees
before reaching House or Senate floors.
||• June 1975, Rep. O’Hara
introduced House Bill (H.R. 8394), proposing to use sports
revenues first to offset cost of that sport, then to support
• July 15, 1977, Senators Tower, Bartlett, & Hruska introduced Senate
Bill (S. 2106), proposing to exclude revenue-producing sports from Title IX coverage.
||HEW issues final Title IX regulation
34 C.F.R. Part 106
|Signed into law by President
Gerald Ford, effective July 21, 1975. Includes provisions
prohibiting sex discrimination in athletics and establishes
window for educational institutions to comply.
||Congress reviews and approves
Title IX regulations and rejects resolutions disapproving
||• June 4,1975:The present
Title IX regulation was transmitted to Congress.
• June 5, 1975, Senator Helms (S. Con. Res. 46), and June 17, 1975, Rep.
Martin (H. Con. Res. 310): disapproving entire Title IX legislation
• June 17, 1975, Rep. Martin (H. Con. Res. 311), disapproving Title IX
legislation only as it has to do with intercollegiate athletics
• July 16, 1975, Senators Laxalt, Curtis & Fannin (S. Con. Res. 52),
disapproving application of Title IX to intercollegiate athletics
|1975 & 1977
||Senate refuses to act on bills
to curtail Title IX enforcement.
||• July 21, 1975, Senator
Helms introduced S. 2146 in an attempt to prohibit the
application of Title IX regulations to athletics where
participation in those athletic activities are not a required
part of the educational institution’s curriculum.
• January 31, 1977, Senator Helms re-introduced S. 2146 as S. 535..
||HEW issues proposed policy “Title
IX and Intercollegiate Athletics” for notice and
||Presumption of compliance based
on substantially equal average per capita expenditures
for men and women athletes and future expansion of opportunity
and participation for women.
||HEW issues final policy interpretation
on “Title IX and Intercollegiate Athletics”
44 Fed. Reg. 71413 et seq.
|December 11, 1979: Rather than
relying exclusively on presumption of compliance standard,
final policy focuses on institution’s obligation
to provide equal opportunity and details the factors to
be considered in assessing actual compliance. (Currently
referred to as the 3-Prong-Test)
||Department of Education is
||DOE was given oversight of
Title IX through the Office for Civil Rights (OCR).
||Grove City vs. Bell Decision
||Removed the applicability of
Title IX in athletics programs by stating that only those
programs or activities which receive direct Federal financial
assistance be held under the umbrella of Title IX.
||Civil Rights Restoration Act
||Becomes law on 3/22/88 after
overriding a Presidential veto by President Ronald Reagan.
Overrides Grove City vs. Bell, and mandates that all educational
institutions which receive any type of Federal financial
assistance, whether it be direct or indirect, be bound
by Title IX legislation.
||Title IX Investigation Manual
||April 2, 1990: OCR, of the
U.S. Dept. of Education, publishes manual. Authored by
Valerie M. Bonnette and Lamar Daniel.
||Franklin vs. Gwinnett County
||February 2, 1992: Supreme Court
rules unanimously that plaintiff’s filing Title IX
lawsuits are entitled to receive punitive damages when
intentional action to avoid Title IX compliance is established.
||NCAA Gender Equity Study
||Shortly after Franklin decision,
NCAA completes and publishes a landmark Gender-Equity study
of its member institutions.
||Equity in Athletics Disclosure
Section 360B of Publ.L. 103-382
34 CFR Part 668.41-668-48
Fed. Reg. 11/29/95 p. 61424
|• September 1993: Sponsored
by Senator Mosley-Braun (S. 1468) and Rep. Collins (H.R.
• States that any coeducational institution of higher education that participates
in any Federal student financial aid program and has an intercollegiate athletics
program must disclose certain information concerning that intercollegiate athletics
• Annual reports required; first disclosure report is to be available no
later than October 1, 1996.
||January 16, 1996: OCR issues
clarifications of three-part “Effective Accommodation
||First EADA report due
||October 1, 1996: All institutions
must have available to all who inquire, specific information
on their intercollegiate athletics department as required
by the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act