> One thing I'm curious about is that in the case in question,
>Brown eliminated two men's sports and two women's sports, so I'm a
>little unclear on the inequity involved.
 
I haven't followed the case *that* closely, so I won't swear to this, but
here is what I believe is the issue:
 
Brown interpreted Title IX to mean that funds (Brown doesn't give
scholarships) have to be equitably divided between men's and women's
sports, with the "interests and abilities" of the students taken into
consideration.  In other words, if a lower perecentage of women wanted to
play sports, Brown could spend less on women's athletics, even though the
campus is approx. 50/50 men/women (actually, 48/52, at last official
count).
 
The plaintiffs argued instead that funds should be divded strictly by the
numbers (and that at any rate, historical prejudice against women in sports
makes it impossible to accurately gague "interests and abilities.").
 
  Under *both* analyses, the number of teams is irrelevant, as some teams
(football) cost much more than others (women's gymnastics, which is the
source of this litigation).  I believe Brown has an equal number of teams
for each gender (may even have more women's teams) but still spends more on
the men.  This is what seems unfair to the plaintiffs (and frankly, I think
they're probably right).  The Circuit Court agreed with the plaintifs (as
had the district court).
 
A note on precedent:  The Supreme Court did not "uphold" the verdict of the
1st Circuit, it refused to hear the case.  Strictly speaking then, this
ruling is binding law only in the First Circuit (Mass., R.I, Maine, and
N.H.).  If this comes up in other areas, Courts may use this decsion as
precedent, but are free to rule otherwise.  It will be interesting to see
how broadly this ruling (made by a divided 3 judge panel) will be applied.
. .
 
Please note: although I am a law student, no statement made in this e-mail
should be construed as legal advice.
 
Carl
 
 
 
Carl Sussman                                              Harvard Law School
 
[log in to unmask]                             Class of '99
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.