Former and current female student-athletes who feel they have been denied equal opportunity at Fresno State are allowed to move forward with a class action lawsuit against the university.
A federal judge granted a motion for class certification in the sex discrimination lawsuit initially filed by former members of the women’s lacrosse program against Fresno State for allegedly violating Title IX.
The backstory: Fresno State eliminated the women’s lacrosse, men’s wrestling and men’s tennis programs after the 2020-2021 season due to mounting financial issues to keep those programs afloat.
- Some lacrosse players responded by filing a sex discrimination lawsuit against Fresno State for violating Title IX by depriving female student-athletes of equal opportunities to participate. The lawsuit also accused the university of treating the lacrosse team far worse than other varsity teams on campus.
- Fresno State moved to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that all of the named plaintiffs have graduated, making the lawsuit moot.
The big picture: Senior U.S. District Court Judge Kimberly Mueller ruled that named plaintiffs can continue to litigate a class certification even after their individual claims have become moot.
- The individual claims of the named plaintiffs expired four months after the lawsuit was initially filed, when the university eliminated the lacrosse program. But Mueller ruled that the four-month timeline would have made it difficult, if not impossible, for a district court to rule on a motion for class certification, especially given since the case has been litigated for four years.
- “If the court were to dismiss on mootness grounds here, Fresno State would be allowed to continue to harm similarly situated female athletes by eliminating teams or subjecting them to unlawful treatment without facing any possibility of consequences,” Mueller ruled.
Zoom in: Mueller certified two classes in the lawsuit.
- The first is for current and future female student-athletes who have lost their membership in an athletics program, have sought but not achieved membership in a program or are able to seek membership in a program but have not done so due to a perceived lack of opportunity.
- The second is for current and future female student-athletes who have participated in women’s programs or are able to participate but have been deterred from doing so because of the treatment received from the university.
What we’re watching: The plaintiffs are asking for a ruling that would force Fresno State to follow Title IX and provide equal protection from sex discrimination.
- Both sides will return to court on April 10 for a status conference.
Read the ruling:
