Titke IX supreme court case

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by refaholic

The unfortnate part of the Michigan case is that the system worked well for so long, and then two parents got upset because their girls didn't get Division 1 scholarships so they claim title nine. Personally, I think it is better for the girl's to play in the fall, because then they do get a fair shake at the stick because the college coaches are not in thier season yet. I am anxious to see how this unfolds.

Isn't part of the problem that the girls play before the ncaa coaches are allowed to visit high schools?

[Kelvin green]

Originally posted by Robmoz
Well, its worked in MI for over 50 years. Two parents, (lawyers I might add) file a suit when their DD did not get a scholarship at her 1st choice school. The EPC of the Constitution was violated here? Please. This was not a class action procedure, this was not about "fixing" a broken system, it wasn't even about gender equity. Now it has taken on the spin of the Fed telling the State what to do under the guise of Title IX and the EPC, viewed as being quite over-judicious by most MI citizens.

It may be the proper enforcement of a Fed law but it sure smells like a fishin expedition to let the courts control what was a rather benign issue that did not need to progress to the level some want to push.

Kelvin, you are quite eloquent with your responses and they "sound" intelligent but your legal training seems to have de-colored your eyeglasses with a haze that forces you to see things in black and white, selectively. This is not about the law although shamefully it has evolved to that.

I love my country but I fear my government!

I am going to disagree with you wholeheartedly. first off I am not flaming liberal or a bleeding heart liberal, but I do believe in the US Constitution, fairness, and equity. Needless to say I have been shot at defending the Constitution and the legal principles that mark its very existence.

You need to get your facts straight.

**Its worked in MI for over 50 years? Girls basketball was not introduced in MI high school sports until the 1970's. so it has not worked for 50 years.

(I am sure that was an argument in Brown v board of Education too. Separate but equal has worked for 100 plus years so why change it now. I am sure all those people in the deep south thought it was over-judicious when the desegregation orders were signed. )What matters most is not the public opinion but was it THE RIGHT THING TO DO!

**This was a certified class action suit.

**One parent (Madsen) who filed suit on behalf of her daughters is a teacher in Grand Rapids. Dont know what the other one is (Roberts-Eveland). Dont know what their spouses may be, BUT They both had daughters in high school playing both sports and members of the affected class.

**It was an Equal Protection issue. MHSAA was found to be a state actor and the girls were not getting equal protection UNDER THE LAW. The 6th Circuit clearly stated that "the scheduling of girlsÂ’ sports seasons in Michigan violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment".

To have disparate treatment of boys and girls there must support a legitimate government obkective and that the discrimination employed must be related to those goals. Clearly MI cannot show that this is a legitimate government objective to treat boys and girls differently
It was obviously about fixing a broken system that treated girls differently than boys. It was about gender equity and girls being treated differently.

**The States have been told what to do under the 14th Amendment since it was passed. That's how the Bill of Rights was extended to the states and extended to you the fundamental rights in a state contect.

**Have you ever read the findings of fact? The facts from the court decison were never challenged and have never been challenged. They must be substantially true or they would have been challenged more! There is more to this than just one season but even with that one season (basketball) The season was all about not being able to fit it in..

The bottom line is that the girs and parents who filed suit wanted the same opportunites and privileges that boys had.

This was an emotional issue that polaraized Michigan High school sports when it should not have. MI has known for over 14 years that there has been unequal treatment and did not take steps to mitigate it and unfortunately it took a federal judge to remedy it. People did not want or were not ready for this change and they don like it...


You wanted my opinion on the Duke article and then BELITTLE my opinion as hazed over, selective and only seeing things in black and white.

You imply that my opinions were not informed and only "sound" intelligent. You ask me to read- I did, only to have that discounted.

My opinion does not match your is one thing but to belittle and discount.

You asked everybody to be informed but it appears to me that a dialogue dealing with this issue was not what you wanted. I presented information that conflicted with yours and you did not like it due to the emotional nature of the case. So it appears to me you only wanted people to be informed on YOUR POSITION!

___


[Edited by Kelvin green on Dec 6th, 2004 at 03:04 PM]

[ShadowStripes]

I think most of us on this forum are better officials than attorneys. Title IX has become one of those sacrosanct issues to which nobody will ever agree. I, for one, believe that the boys and girls should play the same season, and I believe that they should get equal time, but I also believe that no one should complain about possible Title IX violations simply because the varsity girls have to play before the varsity boys. That was never the intention of the law. And yes, I know some high schools play their girls in the "prime time" spot because they are more successful and they draw better attendance, and I fully support that as well. Just wanted to clarify that since some posters seemed to take a sensitive position to my earlier remarks.

[bgtg19]

I agree that doing "the right thing" for girls and boys in high school is what matters most. I think that those in Michigan who see that "the sky is falling" in what the courts are doing are overreacting. If Michigan high school students play sports during the same seasons that students in most other states play, we'll survive. (Yes, I live in MI.) On the other hand, those who see what the courts are doing as "righting injustices" are also, in my opinion, overreacting. Most people who I know love and support their daughters/granddaughters/nieces/etc., want what is best for them ... and also happen to want the seasons to stay as they are. That is, some people think that the current arrangement is best for the girls in our state.

I have followed the case as it has gone through the courts and I ... gasp ... see that there are arguments on both sides. But where the answer is not "clear," and where there is no compelling injustice to overturn, I guess I would like to see the people be able to decide for themselves. (For what it is worth, I don't see this as comparable to the Brown v. Board of Education case at all. Brown overturned a popular "separate but equal" doctrine, but that "popularity" was largely the creation of the majority at the expense of the minority. In the sports season lawsuit, most female high school athletes, most parents, and most school administrators want to see things stay the same. It's not that the boys are trying to keep the girls in different seasons against their will.)

I, too, believe in and am comitted to fairness, justice and equity. I fully support the United States Constitution (although I, thankfully, have never been shot at). I hope that all of us, no matter which side we prefer, will at least acknowledge the other sides' positions and viewpoints and, no matter how the court case comes out, continue our best efforts to give our girls and boys values and experiences that will help them lead fulfilling lives.

[Robmoz]

I'll stand by comments as they are my opinion.

Let me also say that it was not my intent to belittle anyone's opinion to the contrary so I apologize wholeheartedly if anyone feels that way...sometimes my words do not convey what it is that I am trying to say.

That said, I won't get into dissecting further any of the "facts" since that would be purely speculative.

The courts will decide regardless of what I think.

Thanks for your insightful comments Kelvin

[stan-MI]

Kelvin, the only true harm inflicted upon the girls in Michigan was the fact that their seasons were scheduled around the boys, which perhaps made some girls feel like second-class citizens and, for outdoor sports, subjected them to bad weather.

The MHSAA's trial attorneys did not present sufficient or compelling proofs, even though such proofs exist. There are tremendous advantages to having boys and girls play the same sports in different seasons: the best coaches, officials and facilities are available to both boys and girls. For talented basketball players, the fall season gave them an advantage because they had the undivided attention of college recruiters, since no one else was playing.

The MHSAA, though, gave the girls the "lesser" season in every sport, which was wrong. In the case of outdoor sports where weather is a factor, particularly in northern Michigan (eh, Mick), the spring season is short, cold and miserably wet.

As an official, I enjoyed working a full schedule of girls basketball in the fall, followed by a full schedule of boys basketball in the winter. Now I won't be able to work as many games. No big deal.

For the high school boys and girls, though, many will have worse coaches, worse officials, and worse practice times.

[Stat-Man]

Isn't part of the problem that the girls play before the ncaa coaches are allowed to visit high schools?

I could be wrong, but I think there is an exception for Michigan.

One of the girls where I do HS Girls BB Stats had D1 & D2 coaches at our games recruiting her until she made her verbal commitment, so there must be some sort of provision for MI.

[refaholic]

The bottom line is that the girls and parents who filed suit wanted the same opportunites and privileges that boys had.

Kelvin allow me to throw this out now. Are the parents in MI going to file a lawsuit because now the best officials are working the boys games and not the girls. I live in IN and this is an on going issue in Indiana. Why don't we see the same caliber of officiating in girls that we do in the boys. I feel Michigan did a great job of taking care of that by the fall/winter deal. If we really want to get technical about Title 9 that is the next lawsuit. My girl dosen't get the same caliber of officiating as the boys. Think about it. We can throw this around all day and find many faults in the system of all state associations. All this lawsuit did was creat a mockery of HS basketball and the courts have tied the hands of HS associations. What is next to go to court?

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by refaholic


The bottom line is that the girls and parents who filed suit wanted the same opportunites and privileges that boys had.

Are the parents in MI going to file a lawsuit because now the best officials are working the boys games and not the girls. I live in IN and this is an on going issue in Indiana. Why don't we see the same caliber of officiating in girls that we do in the boys.?

Why is it making a mockery of basketball to insist on girls having the same opportunities and privileges as boys? What makes a mockery of sport in general is pretending to give girls equality, but really not making things equal. Why shouldn't girls get the same caliber of officiating as boys? If they don't get it, why shouldn't they sue? That's what Title IX is for! to give legal footing for girls to insist on treatment equal to boys. Why is that a problem?

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by BushRef

I'll tell you what else makes a mockery of sports, is girls thinking they can play on the same level as the boys. It just isn't true in some sports.

Mockery? I think that's a little strong. Maybe it would be more accurate to say that you don't personally like girls. That's your choice, of course, but not the best possible basis for an athletics program at a public high school.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Mockery? I think that's a little strong. Maybe it would be more accurate to say that you don't personally like girls. That's your choice, of course, but not the best possible basis for an athletics program at a public high school.

Hey, there are plenty of men who just don't like girls. No biggie. I understand it's even possible for these types of folks to get married in some states these days.

Whatever floats your boat. :shrug:

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Stat-Man

I could be wrong, but I think there is an exception for Michigan.

One of the girls where I do HS Girls BB Stats had D1 & D2 coaches at our games recruiting her until she made her verbal commitment, so there must be some sort of provision for MI.

Then I really don't see the problem I guess.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Hey, there are plenty of men who just don't like girls. No biggie. I understand it's even possible for these types of folks to get married in some states these days.

Whatever floats your boat. :shrug:

WEll, that wasn't exactly what I meant. I meant that Bush "doesn't like girls' sports". I meant that just because he doesn't like them doesn't make them a mockery. I meant that girls have the right to equal treatment, and whether Bush likes it or not doesn't matter. Schools must treat girls' teams with the same privileges and opportunities. That's the law.

[Jimgolf]

Why should someone in Washington (the state or the D.C.) have any say when girls basketball is played in Michigan? This was never the intent of Title IX. In fact, these two cases illustrate why the federal government should not have gotten involved. One state is being sued because both sports share the same season, the other because they don't.

The purpose of high school sports is to encourage good health and school spirit through sportsmanship and competition, not to compete for athletic scholarships. The court should look at whether or not athletes have equal opportunity to physical fitness and competition, and not concern itself with extrinsic considerations.

[Robmoz]

Originally posted by rainmaker
... Why shouldn't girls get the same caliber of officiating as boys? If they don't get it, why shouldn't they sue? That's what Title IX is for! to give legal footing for girls to insist on treatment equal to boys. Why is that a problem?

Yes, the girls should be entitled to the same high caliber officiating as the boys. The fact is that there are not enough officials to accomodate "same season" schedules. In reality, the highest caliber officials will be scheduled for the boys and the girls will get the less experienced officials - if they can even get full crews to work their games. So in essecence the girls are getting short changed once again.

Originally posted by Jimgolf
Why should someone in Washington (the state or the D.C.) have any say when girls basketball is played in Michigan? This was never the intent of Title IX. In fact, these two cases illustrate why the federal government should not have gotten involved. One state is being sued because both sports share the same season, the other because they don't.

The purpose of high school sports is to encourage good health and school spirit through sportsmanship and competition, not to compete for athletic scholarships. The court should look at whether or not athletes have equal opportunity to physical fitness and competition, and not concern itself with extrinsic considerations.

Great point here Jim, that is what many MI parents are saying. The real focus seems to have been lost here. The issue of scholarships is one of the main arguements for change when it is not even one of the goals in ANY mission statement for a single HS association in ANY state.

If athletes are striving for scholarship opportunities, there are other ways to get noticed besides activities sponsored by their high school. (i.e. AAU participation or camp attendence).

Statisically, it has been shown that participation levels for girls in MI (via survey of the athletes) will diminish due to conflicts in schedules of the sports that girls choose to play. Many girls play multiple sports under the current configuration. The girls in MI that are worthy of scholarship opportunities still get recruited, that is a fact!

This is NOT about gender equity. Here in MI the system works fine, isn't broken, and doesn't need to be fixed. I would love to see this issue turn into a ballot proposal where the citizens could vote as to their wishes for their own community (state) and get the Fed out of it.

Perhaps the focus should be placed upon the NCAA and their rules for recruiting would that not eliminate the problem for the most part?