The 2001 Communities for Equity (CFE) lawsuit against the Michigan High School Athletic Association (The MHSAA)
A Case for Equity
Document Sections:
CFE’s attempts to seek and secure fair treatment for Michigan’s female athletes
Federal Treatment Lawsuit
Court Findings
Results of Federal Lawsuit
The 2001 Communities for Equity (CFE) lawsuit against the Michigan High School Athletic Association (The MHSAA)
A Case for Equity
A Historical Summary
CFE’s attempts to seek and secure fair treatment for Michigan’s female athletes
1993-1998
CFE worked with state, local and educational entities to address equity issues in athletic programs
Parents gathered examples of discrimination: practice schedules, contest schedules (times and sites), programs, uniforms, and support services (pep bands, cheerleaders, concession stands, publicity, media,etc.)
We had actual examples of publications, etc or photos of experienced discrimination. Photos are valuable evidence.
Using materials from the Women’s Sports Foundation (WSF) and The National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) explaining how to address equity issues, we corresponded with the Athletic Director and Superintendent. All written communication needs to include the Superintendent. (At the time, our school districts did not have identified Title IX coordinators.) Most do now, so they should be included in all correspondence.
We partnered with other parents from our school districts with similar concerns and brought Title IX speakers in, to provide in-service meetings to parents, coaches, and administrations. The Michigan Gender Equity Team (M GET), would be able to provide names of possible speakers.
WE met with investigators from the Federal Office of Civil Rights, who provided information about methods to address the discrimination.
We informed administrators (Athletic Director, Superintendent and Title IX officers), of their responsibility to do a self assessment (available at the NWLC or WSF websites, or one in use at the Kent Intermediate School District/KISD ), to show what an equitable sports program needs or to prove they are progressing towards equity.
We developed a working relationship with our local intermediate school district (KISD) and using the self assessment tools from the NWLC and WSF, the KISD developed a gender equity self assessment tool and mandated that every school district within the intermediate area, participate in a self assessment, to be collected by the intermediate district yearly.
We urged school districts to use the self assessment tool to show they are working toward equity, as a means to avoid legal ramifications (Federal Office of Civil Rights Complaint or a legal complaint, filed in a Federal Court.
CFE was particularly successful in dealing with local school districts on individual equity issues. But it became evident that many discriminatory actions were the result of female athletes playing in non traditional sports seasons. The Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA), ignored our correspondence and even the correspondence of the KISD, of the KISD also asking the MHSAA to provide equitable schedules for female athletes.
A Federal Treatment Lawsuit was Filed
6/1998 A Federal Unequal Treatment lawsuit, was filed, alleging the MHSAA's non compliance with the U.S. 14th Amendment, The Elliott-Larsen Act (Michigan’s Civil Rights Law) and Title IX.
CFE filed a complaint (Class action lawsuit) against the MHSAA for gender discrimination, citing a violation of the U.S. Fourteenth Amendment, and Title IX of the Education Act of 1972 and the Michigan Civil Rights Act (Elliott-Larsen law).
CFE was represented by private counsel, the National Women's’ Law Center, and the United States Justice Department
The issues of discrimination included: disparate rules between the girls’ and boys’ golf programs, inequitable facilities between girls’ and boys’ in the MHSAA's member districts, regionals, quarter, semi and final event venues, publicity and promotion inequities, volleyball rules, fewer participation opportunities for girls and season alignment (which ONLY put female athletes in disadvantaged seasons).
7/2001
A Court ordered mediation, resolved all issues except season alignment, when the MHSAA agreed to the following:
Provide equitable publicity (TV coverage, programs, promotions) between genders
In golf, girls and boys will play the same number of holes. (Previously girls played only
9 holes in conference play and boys played 18. In the MHSAA tournament play, both
genders then played 18, at the first MHSAA event.
In addressing the participation inequity, the MHSAA added two new sports for girls.
The MHSAA made the following volleyball program changes; rally scoring, 3 of 5 format and the addition of a libero position.
The MHSAA agreed to provide volleyball facilities that meet specific standards and the inclusion of registered MHSAA officials, as line judges, rather than students or players (which was the previous format).
To ensure that the MHSAA semi and final games in basketball would be held at equitable facilities. For example: Boys’ basketball semi and final tournament play was held in Breslin and the MHSAA agreed to hold the girls’ basketball semi and final events at a facility comparable to Breslin. In fact MHSAA moved the girls’ semi and final games to Breslin at MSU.
To Improve the MHSAA state softball venue, to a regulation fast softball facility.
9/2001
A trial was held in Federal District Court in Kalamazoo, Michigan, dealing with the only unresolved issue: the discriminatory season alignment.
The Season Issue:
It is important to recognize that Only girls sports were played in non-traditional (disadvantaged seasons).
Executive Director Jack Robert, wrote that, ”Boys’ sports were instituted in member schools first and girls’ sports came later, the girls were fitted around pre-existing boys’ programs, so as not to compete or inconvenience existing boys’ programs”.
2001 Girls’ Sport Seasons
Fall Winter Spring
Basketball* Volleyball* Soccer*
Cross Country Gymnastics Softball
Swimming(LP)* SKI Track
Tennis* Swimming (UP) Golf*
Girls’ sports in disadvantaged seasons*: basketball, volleyball, golf, soccer, LP swim and tennis.
Girls have split season UP/Lower Peninsula (LP), in swimming
2001 Boys’ Sport Seasons
Fall Winter Spring
Football Basketball Baseball
Soccer Ice Hockey Track
Cross Country Wrestling Tennis
Golf Ski Swimming
No boys’ sports played in a disadvantageous season
No split seasons between UP/LP
C. The finding that the MHSAA is a state actor, not a private entity
12/17/2001
The Court Decision:
The MHSAA was found to be a state actor (not a private entity).
The MHSAA was found to have violated (1)The 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights law, and Title IX of the Education Act of 1974.
Fourteenth Amendment: “No person shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the U.S.; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny any person within its’ jurisdiction, the equal protection of the laws.”
Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association (TSSAA), the United States Supreme Court found the TSSAA a state actor (2001). Thus MHSAA was also ruled a state actor. (The Fourteenth Amendment applied to the MHSAA actions)
Title IX of the Education Act of 1972: “No person in the United States shall on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination, under any educational program or activity receiving federal funds.”
Elliot-Larsen Act (Michigan’s Civil Rights Act of 1976): The Elliot-Larsen Act prohibits discrimination in Michigan on the basis of ”religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, height, weight, familial status, or marital status” in employment, housing, education, and access to public accommodations.
Judge Enslen ruled that the MHSAA violated the U.S. 14th Amendment, the Elliott-Larsen Act and Title IX.
The Court found that Michigan girls playing in nontraditional seasons, were subject to dissemination (At the time of the lawsuit, 48 states scheduled girls’ basketball in the winter, along with all collegiate programs)
The Court found that the disadvantages of playing basketball in the fall, were as follows:
Fall basketball prevented girls from participating in special camps, shoot-outs or Blue-Star events. For example, in 2001 there were 18 Blue-Star and Nike events between Sept.16 - Oct.21. The MHSAA rules prohibited players from attending these events, during their season of competition.
Fall basketball prohibited girls from participating in the excitement and publicity surrounding March Madness competition.
Girls’ basketball games were scheduled on two school nights (Tuesday and Thursdays) so as not to compete with football. Winter basketball allows for making male and female players to share prime days and times.
Limited access to athletic equipment and clothing. Manufacturers roll out basketball clothing, shoes and equipment, to coincide with the winter season. (Therefore, Michigan female basketball players must choose from what is left from the previous winter.)
Fall basketball put girls in Michigan, at a disadvantage for the opportunity to compete for college scholarships. Most college recruiting occurs at Blue Chip, Nike, Club tournaments that take place in the fall. Again, Michigan players were prohibited from participating in these events, because they occurred during their competitive season.
The Court found the following disadvantages to winter volleyball.
Since 48 other states and all NCAA colleges and universities, play volleyball in the fall, Michigan volleyball players had to purchase the equipment, shoes, etc., that was left over.
High school players were not able to attend college volleyball events, to build skills and team unity.
Almost all college recruiting takes place at the private club programs rather than through high school programs. The most competitive programs for volleyball, are club or travel programs, which begin in January and usually run through June or July. Girls who played in their high school program before a change, were not eligible for these elite programs. (MHSAA rules prohibit)
The court found disadvantages to all non-traditional season play, which may be read in the Court’s decision.
The Court decided the most advantageous seasons in Michigan are:
Sport Season
Basketball Winter
Volleyball Fall
Soccer Fall
Tennis Spring
Golf Fall
Swimming Winter
The Court ordered the MHSAA to submit a compliance plan to address the discriminatory season scheduling.
The MHSAA actually presented several plans, two of which the Court rejected. Communities for Equity suggested that all sports be placed in the traditional, most advantageous seasons.
CFE’s compliance plan had all sports played in the most advantageous seasons.
However, the MHSAA presented the following plan which was then approved by the Court, over the objections of Communities for Equity.
D. The results of the federal lawsuit: a realignment of seasons
MHSAA’s Compliance Plan
Girls’ Sports Seasons
Fall Winter Spring
Volleyball Basketball Soccer(LP)*
Softball
Cross Country
Golf (LP) Ski Track
Swim (LP)*
Soccer (UP) Swim(UP)
*Disadvantaged seasons: Swim (LP), Soccer (LP)
*****Major disadvantage: split seasons between the lower peninsula and upper peninsula
(golf, swim, tennis and soccer) for girls. Girls in the Upper Peninsula participating in
These 4 sports CANNOT compete in state tournaments or win a state
championship.
Boys’ Sports Seasons
Fall Winter Spring
Football Basketball Baseball
Soccer Ice Hockey Track
Cross Country Wrestling Golf*
Tennis* Ski
Swimming
*Disadvantaged seasons: Tennis, Golf
****No split seasons between Upper and Lower peninsula. All male athletes in the Upper Peninsula can participate in state tournament and compete for a state title
Even though the Court rendered a decision in December of 2001, the MHSAA appealed the decision for the next 6 years.
2004 The MHSAA appeals the Districts Courts decision to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, OH. Sixth Circuit rules in CFE’s favor
2005 The MHSAA appeals to the United States Supreme Court; Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Sixth Circuit for clarification
2006 Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of CFE.
2006 The MHSAA appeals the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, to the United State Supreme Court again
2007 United States Supreme Court denies MHSAA’s appeal
Season Change is implemented in the Fall of 2007
The Court’s ruling is available at www.miwd.uscourts.gov.Click on “High Profile Cases, then on Communities for Equity v. Michigan High School Athletic Association