By Robert L. Clayton and Alyson J. Guyan
Competitive cheerleading’s bid to become a recognized varsity sport was dealt a setback after a district judge ruled that during the 2009-10 season, the Competitive Cheer team at Quinnipiac University (“Quinnipiac” or “University”) did not function as a varsity sport capable of counting toward the requirements of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”). However, the ruling does leave the door open for competitive cheerleading to attain varsity status in the future.
District Court Ruling
The Biediger et al. v. Quinnipiac Univ. ruling determined that Quinnipiac failed to meet the proportionality requirement of Title IX because the University incorrectly counted Competitive Cheer as a varsity sport. As a result, Quinnipiac will have 60 days to submit a new Title IX compliance plan.
The court relied on a 2008 “Dear Colleague” letter issued by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) as a guideline to evaluate the status of Quinnipiac’s Competitive Cheer team as a varsity sport. The OCR letter establishes that in order to meet Title IX requirements, the “program structure and administration” and “team preparation and competition” of a proposed sport must be consistent with other varsity sports in an institution’s
intercollegiate athletics program. See Letter from Stephanie Monroe, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Office for Civil Rights, “Dear Colleague,” Sept. 17, 2008, at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20080917.html. After carefully examining the Competitive Cheer team pursuant to this guidance, the judge found distinct differences between Competitive Cheer and Quinnipiac’s other varsity teams.
The recruiting system for the Competitive Cheer team exemplifies the difference in the structure and administration of the team as compared to other programs at Quinnipiac. The other varsity teams at Quinnipiac engage in some level of off-campus recruiting; however, the Competitive Cheer team is made up entirely of enrolled students. The judge also focused on the lack of locker room space for the Competitive Cheer team and the team’s need to buy separate catastrophe insurance. Additionally, the judge found that the regular season and post-season schedules for the Competitive Cheer team greatly differed from the schedules of the other varsity sports. Over the course of the regular season, Competitive Cheer competed against different levels of opponents (including sideline cheer squads and high-school cheerleaders) and under five different scoring systems. Competitive Cheer’s post-season consisted of participating in the National Cheerleaders Association’s National Championship. Entrance into this event is not determined based on regular season performance and the post-season tournament is open to all types of cheer squads, including sideline teams. By comparison, the other varsity programs at Quinnipiac feature progressive championships and compete only against other NCAA varsity teams.
In arguing that Competitive Cheer can be used to satisfy Title IX requirements, Quinnipiac pointed to its founding membership in the National Competitive Stunt and Tumbling Association (“NCSTA” or “Association”) as evidence of competitive cheerleading’s growing status.
Although the judge acknowledged that the NCSTA had made some strides recently, such as establishing a single scoring system for collegiate competitive cheer competitions, he found that the Association had accomplished little else.
Implications of the Court Decision
Despite the ruling in this case, competitive cheerleading may still become a varsity sport in the near future. This ruling does not make any determination about competitive cheerleading in general. Instead, the court focused solely on Quinnipiac’s Competitive Cheer team for the 2009¬10 season. The judge even acknowledged that the future of competitive cheerleading appears bright, writing,
“I have little doubt that at some point in the near future… competitive cheer will be acknowledged as a bona fide sporting activity by academic institutions, the public, and the law.”
–Biediger et al. v. Quinnipiac Univ., No. 3:09cv621 (D. Conn. filed July 21, 2010).
Robert L. Clayton, Esq., is the Chair of the Jackson Lewis Sports Compliance Group in the Washington D.C. Region Office.
Alyson J. Guyan, Esq., is a member of the Jackson Lewis Sports Compliance Group in the Washington D.C. Region Office.
