The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide a question that has divided the federal judiciary for years: can employees at federally funded schools and universities sue their employers for sex discrimination under Title IX?
The justices granted a joint petition brought by Thomas Crowther, a former art professor at Augusta University, and MaChelle Joseph, who coached the women’s basketball team at Georgia Tech for 16 years, after both lost their Title IX claims in the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case, Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, is set to be heard during the court’s October 2026 term.
The dispute turns on whether Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 — which prohibits sex discrimination in any educational program receiving federal funding — gives individual employees the right to sue their employers directly. The 11th Circuit ruled last year that it does not, reasoning that those claims are already covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the primary federal law prohibiting workplace sex discrimination. That ruling put the 11th Circuit at odds with at least eight other federal appeals courts that have allowed such suits to proceed.
The two plaintiffs came to the case through separate but related circumstances. Joseph alleges she was fired in 2019 shortly after filing an internal complaint claiming Georgia Tech was shortchanging her program compared to the men’s basketball team on resources and facilities. Crowther was told in 2021 that his contract would not be renewed following a Title IX investigation into allegations by students of inappropriate classroom conduct, including sexual harassment — allegations he denies.
The practical stakes of the court’s ruling extend beyond these two individuals. Title IX, unlike Title VII, does not cap the damages a plaintiff can recover. It also does not require workers to first file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission before heading to court — a potentially significant procedural advantage for employees who believe they’ve faced discrimination.
The U.S. Solicitor General’s office, asked by the court to weigh in, urged the justices to take the case and sided with the 11th Circuit’s interpretation, arguing that Title IX lacks the explicit statutory language needed to establish a private right of action for employees.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs have argued the opposite, pointing to the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, in which the court held that a high school girls’ basketball coach could sue for retaliation under Title IX after he was fired for complaining that his team wasn’t receiving equal resources. “Since this Court’s decision in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education … every court of appeals to have considered the question presented here has answered yes,” lawyers for Joseph and Crowther wrote in their August 2025 petition to the high court. “The Eleventh Circuit held otherwise.”
The court’s eventual ruling could determine whether employees at thousands of public schools and universities across the country retain a federal tool — with distinct advantages over Title VII — to challenge sex discrimination by their employers.
