By Ellen J. Staurowsky, Ed.D., Senior Writer and Professor, Sports Media, Ithaca College, staurows@ithaca.edu
As U.S. President Donald J. Trump returns to the White for a second term of office, uncertainties loom large in terms of the status of existing Title IX regulations as well as the attention and resources officials in the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (USDOE-OCR) will devote to enforcement. An argument can be made that Title IX is no less controversial today in its application to federally funded schools and their athletic programs than it was when passed in 1972 and may in fact be much more controversial in this era.
U.S. Presidential Administrations & Their Impact on Title IX
Nearly all presidential administrations have left their mark on the evolution of Title IX. President Gerald R. Ford (1974-77) wavered on the release of the regulation while President Jimmy Carter (1977-81) did the same with the “Policy Interpretation.” During President Ronald Reagan’s administration, delays occurred as his administration entertained the idea that Title IX should not apply at all to athletics, a consideration that paralleled the Grove City College v. Bell (1984) case. Even after the passage of the Civil Rights Restoration Act, which restored enforcement authority to apply Title IX to athletics, presidential administrations under George H. W. Bush (1989-93) and in the early years of Bill Clinton (1993-2001) remained less than aggressive about ensuring that female athletes competing in the nation’s schools were protected from sex discrimination. “As a result, the public’s perception of Title IX’s constitutional legitimacy was seriously eroded. A statute that was out of sight was also, to the public, out of mind” (Orleans, 1996, p. 137). Secretary of Education during the George W. Bush (2001-2009) administration, Roderick Paige, tasked a blue-ribbon Commission on Opportunity in Athletics in 2002 to propose recommendations that many believed would weaken Title IX’s application to athletics. After eight months of hearings and spirited public debate, and despite a majority report that urged changes that would have negatively impacted the growth of women’s sports, efforts to undermine the law were abandoned due to public support for existing regulations (Litsky, 2003; U.S. Department of Education, 2003).
President Barach Obama (2009-2017) along with his then vice-president Joseph Biden were credited with reshaping Title IX enforcement generally on college campuses, most specifically in terms of sexual assault. Between 2011 and 2016, the USDOE-OCR moved to investigate 344 institutions, prompting increasing investments in Title IX offices and personnel (Title IX coordinators, Title IX investigators) (Larkin, 2016). Guidance issued by the OCR clarified that Title IX’s prohibitions against sexual harassment included sexual violence. It also emphasized that schools had an obligation to respond to sexual harassment and violence when it occurred with reporting and hearing procedures in place. Heralded as an important step forward in using the law to foster safer learning environments in schools, the guidelines issued during the Obama Administration became the subject of intense scrutiny, review, and revision as the country transitioned to President Donald Trump’s first term in office (2017-2021).
Title IX During the First Trump Administration (2017-2021) & Biden Administration (2021-2025)
Rescinding previous guidance, then U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, a Trump appointee, released a new set of guidelines in 2020 that provided more protections for alleged perpetrators of sexual harassment and sexual violence with a focus on due process concerns, narrowed the definition of sexual harassment, set limits on when a complainant who believed they were subjected to sexual harassment could submit a complaint, and offered schools the chance, if they wished, to adopt a higher standard of proof the complainant would need to meet in the form of the clear and convincing standard rather than preponderance of the evidence. As the National Women’s Law Center (2020) pointed out, “Schools will be allowed—and in many cases, forced—to ignore sexual harassment victims if: (i) they were sexually harassed in the wrong place; (ii) they asked the wrong person for help; (iii) they haven’t suffered enough by DeVos’s standard; (iv) they are no longer participating or trying to participate in the school’s program or activity; (v) their respondent is no longer at their school; or (vi) they don’t submit a written complaint” (p. 1).
With the election of President Joseph Biden (2021-2025), an effort was made to restore much of the guidance that had been in place during the Obama era, while also offering a definition of sex discrimination that included protections for gender identity and clarifying the rights of pregnant students. After years of review, discussion, litigation, and rancorous public discourse, the Biden Title IX Final Rule was issued in April of 2024. The Final Rule’s clarification of what the term “on the basis of sex” means, “include[ing] discrimination on the basis of sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity” spawned several lawsuits filed by Republican state attorneys general resulting in injunctions blocking enforcement of the rule in 26 states (Walsh, 2024). On January 9, 2025, just as President Biden prepared to leave office, the Final Rule was vacated by a judge in the Eastern District of Kentucky in Tennessee, et al. v. Cardona (Civil Action No. 2: 24-072). In brief, according to the opinion, the DOE had erred in exceeding its authority when it sought to expand the definition “on the basis of sex” to include “gender identity”. In the states where injunctions were already blocking the Final Rule, they had been advised to follow the 2020 DeVos Rule. With the decision in Tennessee, et al. v. Cardona (2025) other states were advised to do the same.
Trump’s Second Term in Office Awaits
As President Trump assumes office for the second time, it is a relative certainty that he will take immediate action to ban transgender athletes from participating on teams that align with their gender identifies through an executive order. That said, there is the uncertainty as to what position his nominee for Secretary of Education, former World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) executive, Linda McMahon will take on this and other education issues. Organizations like the National Education Association (NEA) have opposed McMahon’s nomination on the basis of the fact that she is unqualified; is likely to work toward privatizing public education; and expand voucher programs to the detriment of the educational needs of the poorest children in schools (Litvinov, 2024). More broadly, there is concern that McMahon would be tasked with eliminating the Department of Education as part of Trump’s expressed view that responsibility for education should be taken up at the state level (Meltzer, 2024). In terms of Title IX, given this new Trump Administration’s pronounced efforts to rid government agencies of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs on Day 1, it is expected that whatever the path ahead, it will be a troubled one for Title IX.
Note: Sentences 2-8 in Paragraph 2 were excerpted from Staurowsky et al., 2022.
References
Flannery, M. E. (2020, May 12). With Title IX changes, Betsy DeVos puts more students at risk of violence. National Education Association Blog. https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/title-ix-changes-put-students-at-risk
Larkin, M. (2016, November 25). The Obama Administration Remade Sexual Assault Enforcement on Campus. Could Trump Unmake It? WBUR.org. https://www.wbur.org/news/2016/11/25/title-ix-obama-trump
Litsky, F. (2003, July 17). Bush Administration says Title IX should stay as it is. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/12/sports/colleges-bush-administration-says-title-ix-should-stay-as-it-is.html
Litvinov, A. (2024, November 20). Top three reasons Linda McMahon should not Be Secretary of Education. NEA Today. https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/top-three-reasons-linda-mcmahon-should-not-be-secretary-education
Meltzer, N. (2024, November 20). Trump picks Linda McMahon to lead, and possibly dismantle, Education Department. The Hechinger Report. https://hechingerreport.org/trump-picks-linda-mcmahon-to-lead-and-possibly-dismantle-education-department/
Orleans, J. (1996). An end to the odyssey: Equal athletic opportunities for women. Duke Journal of Gender, Law, and Policy, 3, 131-162. https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgiviewcontent.cgi?article=1226&context=djglp
Staurowsky, E. J., Flowers, C., Buzuvis, E., Darvin, L., & Welch, N. (2022). Title IX at 50: We’re not done yet! Women’s Sports Foundation. https://www.womenssportsfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Title-IX-at-50-Report-FINALC-v2-.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Secretary’s Commission for Opportunity in Athletics,
Open to All: Title Kat 30, Washington, D.C., 2003. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ERIC-ED480939/pdf/ERIC-ED480939.pdf
