Irrespective of anyone's political thoughts, this is not a ruling...it is not law. It doesn't matter. What does matter, is the law of Title IX. Let's dive in with out any "I agree or disagree political" thoughts...and just state the facts, which overwhelmingly show that Title IX was not only supported by but marshalled into being by the Republican Party (or at least with a great proportion that overwhelmingly agreed with the principles behind Title IX).
Title IX was instituted in 1972 under the legislative act of Congress, which had a Democratic majority in both the Senate and the House, with majority leaders hailing from two conservative states (Montana and Louisiana, respectively). The President was Richard Nixon, who ended up signing the law into the books. The Senate passed it 88-6, with 38 of 44 Republican Senators voting in favor and 49 of 55 Dem Senators in favor, with each side having 3 holdouts, and there was 1 "Conservative" Yea vote. It was passed overwhelmingly across political viewpoints. In the House, it was passed 275-125, with 135 Dems Yea, 96 Nay, and 23 Abstaining. On the minority Republican side, 140 Yeas, 29 Nay, 8 abstaining. Considering the President was a Republican, this law was effectively passed and supported by the Republicans and NOT the Dems. If it were not for Republican votes in the House or Senate (overwhelmingly so), there is no way this becomes law.
After it became law, Nixon required the Dept of HEW to work on additional clarifications, while John Towers later sought to exempt sports in college from its application, which was a slippery slope. So Javits came in (also a Republican like Towers), and created the reasonable exemptions carve out that would afford colleges more latitude in its application of Title IX. This was later codified as 34 CFR 106. There have been no changes to 34 CFR 106 since, just "guidance" letters.
Then it went to the courts, (Grove) where the USSC held that Title IX only applied to institutions receiving DIRECT federal aid. That Court included a MAJORITY of 7-2 justices appointed by Republican Presidents. This was modified in 1988 by the Civil Rights Restoration Act, which narrowed the direct assistance condition precedent to ANY assistance from the federal government granted to an institution. This was upheld by the USSC in Franklin, in 1992. The 1992 court added Clarence Thomas, making the conservative justice majority an 8-1 split. George W. Bush signed into law the Patsy Mink Opportunity in Education Act in 2002, and a slim House majority of Dems and a split Senate (with VP Dick Cheney as the tie breaking vote in any Senate vote) passed amendments to the Act to support federal abstinence program wishes (from Repubs) by giving the other side of the aisle greater flexibility in single-sex classes and extracurricular activities as the primary and secondary school levels.
Forget for a moment about all of our personal thoughts on the value of Title IX and its use in education, it is a law and only Congress (with the veto power of the President) can change it. This was a law supported and passed by both sides of the aisle and frankly, without the Republican support, was D.O.A. A guidance memo from the DOE means absolutely squat.
That said, I do expect lawsuits over this for any NIL money (not from collectives, they are presumably outside the reach of Title IX so long as the school offers no direction or control over the collective or where the collective sends its monies) or payment (House settlement) for revenue sharing managed by an institution of higher learning.
So, let's not get up and arms over an outgoing President's appointee (Sect of Education) led department issuing a guidance letter. The letter literally follows the law instituted by Congress and a Republican President.
(I may have focused on this a bit in law school...24 years ago)

Bookmarks