DeLorenzo v. NFL and Sports Officiating Discrimination

May 29, 2026

By Katelyn Kohler, Esq.

Professional sports leagues have faced many discrimination suits brought by their own officials. They have settled some, defeated others, and outlasted most. DeLorenzo v. National Football League[1] is the next one in line. Former NFL line judge Robin DeLorenzo alleges that the league publicly celebrated her as a historic hire for women while systematically dismantling her career through gender discrimination, a hostile work environment, and retaliation. The NFL has denied the allegations, stating that DeLorenzo “was terminated following three seasons of documented underperformance” and that the claims are “baseless.”[2] Whether DeLorenzo’s case succeeds where others have failed will depend on how courts evaluate a factual record that, if proven, is among the more specifically documented in this lineage of sports officiating discrimination litigation.

Background

DeLorenzo joined the NFL in 2022 as one of ten officials hired that season, becoming only the third woman to serve as a permanent on-field official in league history.[3] Her officiating pedigree was substantial: two decades of experience, the first woman to work a New Jersey high school state championship, the first woman to officiate “The Game” between Ohio State and Michigan, and during her two seasons in the Big Ten Conference she officiated premier games including the Fiesta Bowl.[4] By any traditional measure, she would be considered quite qualified for the role. The complaint names the NFL, former Senior Vice President of Officiating Walt Anderson, and former officiating trainer Byron Boston as defendants. The complaint asserts causes of action for gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation under Title VII and New York state laws.[5]

The complaint details the alleged pattern of conduct spanning all three of DeLorenzo’s NFL seasons. In her first season, crew chief John Hussey purportedly subjected her to persistent verbal abuse including repeatedly telling her to “shut [her] f[**]king mouth,” used aggressive hand gestures to silence her on the field, and by end of season refused to speak to her entirely.[6] Anderson separately directed her to wear a visible ponytail so television audiences could identify her as a woman on the field.[7] When DeLorenzo raised concerns with Hussey about this directive, Hussey responded with hostility, telling her she had no right to question her supervisor and should, virtually, do as she was told.[8]

The complaint alleges additional acts of humiliation. The NFL never provided DeLorenzo with properly fitting uniforms so, she purchased her own women’s athletic wear and ironed NFL shield patches onto it herself to fit in.[9] At Steelers training camp, Hussey arranged for DeLorenzo to sing in front of the entire team and coaching staff as a sort of rookie hazing ritual. Anderson attended, promised not to record her, and recorded her anyway.[10] In her second season, Anderson replaced DeLorenzo’s injured counterpart with an official who had never worked the line of scrimmage, forcing DeLorenzo to train her replacement in real time while managing her own responsibilities.[11] At her end of season review, Anderson told her she needed to learn to “Let It Go” from Disney’s Frozen because her problem was a “mental one.”[12]

The most consequential allegation involves “the Clinic incident” where Anderson and Boston directed DeLorenzo, over her union’s objection, to attend a lower level college officiating clinic in Arkansas designed to train aspiring NCAA officials; a requirement no male NFL official had ever faced.[13] Boston told DeLorenzo she had no real choice, invoking the recent termination of another female official who had refused the same assignment.[14] The union filed a successful grievance on her behalf, resulting in reimbursement of her expenses and early termination of her probationary period, suggesting the conduct was found improper under the NFL’s own collective bargaining rules by an independent institutional process.[15]

In her third and final season, incoming Vice President of Officiating Ramon George implemented a new grading system. The complaint alleges that graders with close ties to Anderson and Boston applied the system inconsistently, holding DeLorenzo to stricter standards than male officials on comparable calls.[16] She was removed from five games that season.[17] Then in February 2025, George terminated DeLorenzo by phone citing the totality of her three-season performance record.[18]

The complaint alleges the termination was pretextual. George had no independent knowledge of DeLorenzo’s three-year history and would have relied on information conveyed by Anderson and Boston. George also publicly claimed the NFL helped DeLorenzo secure her return to college officiating, a characterization she disputes as a deliberate effort to diminish her own professional standing.[19] According to sources, George specifically brokered these departures to Power conference programs in a “noteworthy” structure.[20] By accepting the placement offer, the officials bypassed the union and any grievance process entirely, foreclosing the very labor protections DeLorenzo had previously used successfully.[21]

A History of Falling Short in Officiating Discrimination Cases

Sports officiating discrimination cases have a long history. A professional baseball umpire for thirteen years in the minor leagues, Pamela Postema filed suit in 1991 alleging gender discrimination after the National League and American League made clear they had no interest in hiring her.[22] The Southern District of New York found that because neither league promoted any umpires during the relevant period, male or female, Postema could not establish she was treated differently than similarly situated male applicants.[23] The case settled and Postema never umpired a major league game.

Sandra Ortiz-Del Valle fared better. She sued the NBA in 1996, alleging the league refused to hire her as a referee because of her gender despite her qualifications exceeding those of at least ten male referees they did hire.[24] The NBA argued she lacked the physical conditioning its evaluation process required. She called the NBA’s own decision-makers as witnesses and demonstrated through their testimony that the criteria applied to her was inconsistent compared to male candidates.[25] After a six-day jury trial in 1998, the jury found the NBA’s merit-based justification pretextual and found in her favor.

Angel Hernandez had no such luck. He sued MLB more recently in 2017, alleging racial and national origin discrimination after being passed over for crew chief promotions and World Series assignments.[26] The district court granted summary judgment for MLB in 2021, and the Second Circuit affirmed in 2023, finding Hernandez failed to establish a statistically significant disparity in promotion rates.[27] His case rested on inference and that evidentiary gap proved fatal.

The pattern across these cases is consistent. Leagues invoke performance-based justifications. Evaluation systems are obscure and supervisor-controlled. Statistical evidence alone fails at summary judgment. And settlement, when it comes, comes quickly and quietly.

What Makes DeLorenzo Different

DeLorenzo’s complaint alleges conduct that is direct, specific, named, and in several instances documented. The clinic incident is very persuasive. The NFL had every opportunity to defend it as a legitimate training decision and did not prevail. The NFL then cited the totality of all three seasons to justify her termination, a termination letter signed by a supervisor who, the complaint alleges, had no independent knowledge of her three-year history and relied on information conveyed by the same individuals whose conduct the grievance process had already found improper.[28]

Where Hernandez alleged a pattern of omission, DeLorenzo alleges affirmative acts. Where Postema was never hired, DeLorenzo was employed, evaluated, grieved, and fired. Courts evaluating hostile work environment claims examine the totality of the circumstances.[29] That totality here spans three documented seasons, a successful union grievance, broadcast video footage allegedly showing Hussey silencing DeLorenzo, and a grading record DeLorenzo alleges she can compare directly against male officials on equivalent calls.[30]

The NFL’s Defense and the Probable Outcome

Under McDonnell Douglas, once DeLorenzo establishes this prima facie case of discrimination, the burden shifts to the NFL to articulate a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for her termination.[31] The NFL has already done so publicly, citing underperformance.[32] The harder question is whether DeLorenzo can show that reason is pretextual. The complaint attacks the integrity of the grading apparatus directly, and the successful grievance provides institutional corroboration that at least one of their acts was found improper.

The retaliation claim may be the strongest in the pleading. Under Burlington Northern,[33] the Supreme Court held that the anti-retaliation provision extends to any employer action that would dissuade a reasonable employee from making or supporting a discrimination complaint, even outside the formal terms of employment.[34] The forced clinic assignment over union objection, removal from more games than any other official, and the post-termination claim that the NFL secured her college placement would likely satisfy that framework.

The NFL’s formal answer is pending, but a realistic trial date is unlikely before 2028 or 2029, and the case will probably not get there. As Sportico noted, the Ortiz-Del Valle precedent is a reminder that when leagues insist they made merit-based decisions, juries can disagree, and that dynamic is precisely what will likely push the parties toward settlement.[35]

Sports officiating discrimination cases arrive infrequently and fail often. Postema settled in 1991. Ortiz-Del Valle won at trial in 1998. Hernandez lost at summary judgment in 2021 and on appeal in 2023. The eight-year gap between Hernandez and DeLorenzo is not evidence of progress. It is evidence that the structural problems driving these cases remain unaddressed and largely unchallenged. DeLorenzo v. NFL has a better factual foundation than most, but stronger does not necessarily mean successful. What is certain is that every professional league reading this complaint should recognize its own practices somewhere in it and act accordingly before the next one is filed.

Katelyn Kohler, Esq. is a graduate of Suffolk University Law School in Boston, specializing in Sports & Entertainment, Intellectual Property, and Labor & Employment Law. She holds dual degrees from Ithaca College in Business Administration: Sports Management and Legal Studies.

  1. See Complaint, DeLorenzo v. Nat’l Football League, No. 1:26-cv-02546 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 27, 2026) [hereinafter “Complaint”]. ↑

  2. Ben Austro, Chris Seubert & Cam Filipe, Former Official Sues the NFL for Discrimination and Harassment in a Bombshell Civil Complaint, Football Zebras (Mar. 31, 2026), https://www.footballzebras.com/2026/03/former-official-sues-the-nfl-for-discrimination-and-harassment-in-a-bombshell-civil-complaint/ (quoting NFL’s response to complaint). ↑

  3. See id. ↑

  4. See Complaint, supra note 1, at pg. 6-7, ¶ 22. ↑

  5. Id. at p. 2, ¶ 6; see also Civil Rights Act of 1964, tit. VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 290 et seq.; N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-101 et seq.; N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq. (listing federal and state law claims). ↑

  6. See Complaint, supra note 1, at pg. 10–12, ¶¶ 29(b)–(e). ↑

  7. See id. at pg. 8, ¶ 27(a)(i)(“The implication being that this would make her look feminine and/or make her

    stand out as being a token female on the field.”). ↑

  8. See id. at pg. 10–11, ¶ 29(a) (quoting Hussey’s response as “who do you think you are?, you are to listen to your boss, and are you crazy?”). ↑

  9. See id. at pg. 8, 12–13, ¶¶ 27(a)(ii), 31(a)–(d) (discussing actions she had to take about uniform gear). ↑

  10. See id. at pg. 8–10, ¶¶ 27(b)(i)–(iv)(describing DeLorenzo’s performance at Steelers training camp as “an utterly humiliating singing performance”). ↑

  11. See id. at pg. 13–14, ¶ 35. ↑

  12. See Complaint, supra note 1, pg. 14–15, ¶ 36. ↑

  13. See id. at pg. 15–17, ¶¶ 37(a), 38 (describing the clinic as a lower level college officiating program that differed significantly from the NFL). ↑

  14. See id. at pg. 15–16, ¶¶ 37(b)(i)–(ii), 38. In a conversation where DeLorenzo expressed concerns about attending the clinic, Boston told DeLorenzo to “listen to the rumors” about the other female official’s impending termination and that she “surely did not want to end up like her.” Id. at pg. 16, ¶ 37(b)(ii). ↑

  15. See id. at pg. 18, ¶ 41. ↑

  16. See id. at pg. 19–20, ¶¶ 49–50. (alleging the new grading system was comprised entirely of men who applied it in a “disparate and inconsistent manner”). ↑

  17. See id. at pg. 20, ¶ 51. ↑

  18. See id. at pg. 21, ¶ 53. ↑

  19. See Complaint, supra note 1, at pg. 21–22, ¶ 54. ↑

  20. Ben Austro, NFL Relegates 3 Officials to Work in College Conferences, Football Zebras (Apr. 9, 2025), https://www.footballzebras.com/2025/04/nfl-relegates-3-officials-to-work-in-college-conferences/. ↑

  21. See id. The placement structure George brokered induced officials to waive grievance rights in exchange for a professional landing spot, a significant tradeoff since the current collective bargaining agreement has already made reinstatement appeals considerably more difficult to win. See id. ↑

  22. Postema v. Nat’l League of Prof’l Baseball Clubs, 799 F. Supp. 1475, 1480 (S.D.N.Y. 1992). ↑

  23. See Postema Still Calls ‘Em Like She Sees ‘Em, Las Vegas Rev.-J. (Mar. 1, 2007), https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/sports-columns/ed-graney/postema-still-calls-em-like-she-sees-em/ (reporting case settled out of court). ↑

  24. See Ortiz-Del Valle v. Nat’l Basketball Ass’n, 42 F. Supp. 2d 334, 336 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); see also Michael McCann, NFL Referee Gender Bias Lawsuit Echoes 30-Year-Old NBA Case, Sportico (Apr. 1, 2026), https://www.sportico.com/law/analysis/2026/nfl-gender-bias-referee-lawsuit-legal-analysis-1234888960/. ↑

  25. See McCann, supra note 23 (reporting how Ortiz-Del Valle succeed); see also Revolution Interrupted: Why Has the NBA’s Effort to Hire Female Refs Stalled?, Bleacher Report (Apr. 2, 2018), https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2765250-revolution-interrupted-why-has-the-nbas-effort-to-hire-female-refs-stalled (discussing the NBA’s lackluster history of female officiating after jury found NBA’s merit-based justification against Ortiz-Del Valle pretextual). ↑

  26. Hernandez v. Major League Baseball, No. 17-cv-00315 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2021). ↑

  27. Id., aff’d, No. 21-2074, slip op. at 11 (2d Cir. Aug. 15, 2023). ↑

  28. See Complaint, supra note 1, at pg. 19–21, ¶¶ 50, 53. ↑

  29. Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993). ↑

  30. See Complaint, supra note 1, at pg. 11–12, ¶ 29(d). The complaint states DeLorenzo possesses video evidence from the Giants-Washington broadcast showing Hussey telling her to “calm down” and “stop,” using hand gestures to shut her down, ignoring her entirely, and turning to address her male counterpart who had thrown a flag on the same play before announcing the call. See id. ↑

  31. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973). ↑

  32. See Austro, supra note 2. ↑

  33. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53, 68 (2006). ↑

  34. See id. at 68–69 (emphasizing that materially adverse actions are evaluated objectively from the perspective of a reasonable employee and are not limited to formal employment decisions). ↑

  35. See McCann, supra note 22. ↑

Articles in Current Issue