Following a significant decision from the U.S. District Court, Riley Gaines’ lawsuit against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has moved forward to the discovery phase. Judge Tiffany Johnson of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied the NCAA’s motion to dismiss partially, which has been a major milestone in the ongoing legal battle. The lawsuit, filed in March 2024, has been a focal point of the larger debate around Title IX and gender equity in women’s sports. It is not a simple case of whether a transgender athlete can participate in women’s sports; it’s about whether a college athletic organization that receives significant federal funding can operate in ways that do not respect the rights of female athletes and maintain fair competition.
Gaines and other plaintiffs argue that the NCAA’s current policy allowing biological male trans athletes to participate in women’s sports undermines the integrity of competition and violates the rights of female athletes. The case highlights the growing legal and political tensions around the inclusion of transgender athletes in collegiate sports. This case is particularly significant because it involves several high-profile athletes who have come forward to share their experiences. These include Brooke Slusser, the former San Jose State volleyball captain who has spoken out about her experiences with former trans teammate Blaire Fleming, and Caroline Hill, a former RIT track and field athlete who has shared her story involving Sadie Schreiner. These personal accounts provide a compelling narrative to the legal argument that the NCAA’s current policies are detrimental to the interests of female athletes.
The ruling by Judge Johnson has allowed the case to move forward as the NCAA had filed to dismiss it, arguing that it was not a state actor and therefore not subject to Title IX requirements. However, Judge Johnson denied this and acknowledged that the NCAA does receive federal financial assistance, which makes it subject to Title, IX compliance. The case has already named University of Georgia System and Georgia Tech as co-defendants, but those universities have moved to dismiss their involvement, which was granted by Judge Johnson. This ruling marks a critical point in the legal proceedings, as it allows the case to enter the discovery phase, where both sides will gather evidence and prepare for possible court proceedings. The next steps will involve the plaintiffs and their legal team working to build their case against the NCAA, arguing that the organization’s policies are not in compliance with federal law and have caused significant harm to female athletes.
The NCAA’s statement in response to the ruling has been one of support for its current policies, claiming that its inclusion of transgender athletes aligns with the Trump administration’s order and that it continues to promote Title IX by investing in women’s sports. These statements reflect the broader political and legal landscape of this case. On the other hand, attorneys for the plaintiffs, including Bill Bock of the Independent Council on Women’s Sports (ICONS), have praised the ruling as a significant step forward, emphasizing that the NCAA has historically avoided accountability under Title IX. As the case moves forward, this litigation may serve as a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse around transgender inclusion in sports and the legal implications of Title IX compliance for collegiate athletic organizations.