Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company  
The Boston Globe
May 30, 2002, Thursday ,THIRD EDITION
SECTION: NATIONAL/FOREIGN; Pg. A6

LENGTH: 808 words

HEADLINE: Material from the Associated Press was used in this report.;
US ASKS DISMISSAL OF TITLE IX SUIT

BYLINE: By Mary Leonard, Globe Staff

BODY:
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration yesterday asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a wrestling coaches association that challenges how Title IX, the law that bars sex discrimination in intercollegiate sports, is enforced.

The suit against the Education Department contends that US rules are illegal, encourage gender quotas, and "mandate the very discrimination that Title IX prohibits." In order to achieve equality, many colleges and universities have trimmed men's sports instead of adding women's teams.

   The Justice Department response, filed late yesterday afternoon on behalf of the Education Department, did not address the merits of the coaches' complaint. Instead, the administration made procedural arguments, asserting that the coaches were out of bounds in suing the government when it is universities, for reasons that may or may not involve Title IX compliance, that cut men's teams and cap rosters.

Further, the department argued, "sovereign immunity," which bars the federal government from being sued, applies in this case, as does a six-year statute of limitations on challenges to the 1979 rules.

In a statement, Mike Moyer, executive director of the National Wrestling Coaches Association, called the Justice Department's response "standard legal procedure."

"It in no way diminishes the strength of our position," he said. "We . . . remain confident of restoring Title IX to its original intent: fairness for every athlete."

Late last night, Education Department General Counsel Brian Jones said in a statement: "The administration strongly supports Title IX. . . . We believe we should strive to expand opportunities for women in a way that does not diminish existing men's teams."

The case, which was supported by a number of other coaching groups and watched closely by women's sports advocates, is the first that attempts to hold the Education Department and its Title IX enforcement policies responsible for the elimination of men's teams.

It also presented the Bush administration with an opportunity to affirm its support for Title IX and the 20-year-old regulations that enforce it. The most controversial is the proportionality rule, under which colleges are required to keep the number of male and female athletes in proportion to the number of men and women in the undegraduate student body.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, Bush expressed his support for Title IX but signaled that he might be sympathic to sports like men's wrestling, which has lost 170 teams in 20 years.

Marcia D. Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, said she was alarmed that the Justice Department had not addressed the merits of Title IX in its 40-page brief.

"What is revealing is what the government didn't say," Greenberger said. "It made absolutely no defense of the underlying policies that were challenged by the wrestlers, and it sets off alarm bells as to what the future plans of the administration might be, whether they are keeping their options open to roll back and weaken Title IX enforcement."

Title IX is viewed by most women's rights groups as the most important piece of civil rights legislation in a generation. The number of female college athletes has grown from 30,000 in 1972 to 157,000 today, and the number of women's varsity teams has nearly doubled, to more than 9,000.

The National Women's Law Center argues that the problem lies not with the law, but with universities that eliminate teams rather than cutting idle players or dollars from popular sports such as football and basketball.

The center cites studies that have shown that the majority of schools comply without cutting men's teams or relying on comparisons to enrollment and that men's participation in athletics has increased, as well as women's.

Conservative groups like the Independent Women's Forum say federal regulators have zealously overinterpreted Title IX, creating gender preferences for women and ignoring the different interests and abilities of males and females. They hailed an Education Department decision to review Title IX regulations.

"We absolutely should revisit these regulations," said Christine Stolba, a senior fellow at the forum. "The public has forgotten that Title IX isn't just for girls. Mothers of sons want equal opportunity, too. They want to know why their sons can't wrestle while athletic directors are scouring college cafeterias, looking for girls to do archery."

The Justice Department suit noted that Title IX regulations have been upheld by seven appellate courts. The key test came in 1996, when the US Supreme Court refused to review a ruling by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston that Brown University was guilty of sex discrimination for cutting financial support to women's volleyball and gymnastics teams in 1991.

LOAD-DATE: May 30, 2002