Sports and the Law: Can Schools ‘Cheer’ Their Way into Title IX Compliance?
Last Tuesday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that a cheerleader who allegedly failed to spot his teammate was immune from liability under a Wisconsin assumption-of-risk statute, which forbids bringing a claim against any amateur athlete who acts negligently while performing a sport. In reaching this conclusion, the court explained that competitive cheerleading was indeed a “sport” based on the American Heritage Dictionary’s definition of that word: “an activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs.”
Upon learning of this decision, one astute Above the Law reader asked if courts would similarly find cheerleading to be a sport under Title IX of the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act. This is an especially interesting question because some schools including the University of Maryland and Seton Hall University have granted varsity status to their disproportionately female cheerleading squads. Thus far, the Department of Education has not taken a stance on these particular schools’ Title IX compliance, nor has there been a test case in our court system.
After the jump, should cheerleaders count for Title IX purposes?
Before assessing whether a particular school may safely count cheerleading as a varsity sport for Title IX purposes, it is important to clarify that the recent Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling does not provide any direct guidance. Indeed, Title IX, as a federal statute, is subject to interpretation only from federal courts. In addition, the definition of “sports” under Title IX may differ dramatically from a definition of the term “sports” in a tort-law statute. As Professor Howard Wasserman recently discussed on his website Sports Law Blog, the word “sports” has several potential definitions.
Beyond that strong disclaimer, however, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision is still noteworthy for Title IX purposes because it draws attention a new variety of cheerleading, often known as “competitive cheer.” Competitive cheer involves participants that, much like gymnasts, perform stunts, which earn points based on originality, strength and dexterity. Because competitive cheerleading is in some ways more like gymnastics than organized rooting, it is unlikely the sort of activity that the U.S. Department of Education’s Peter Holmes had considered when he proclaimed in a 1975 letter that although cheerleading was an extracurricular activity, schools may not count members of their cheerleading squad for purposes of calculating an athletic department’s Title IX compliance.
Since Holmes’s 1975 memo, the advent of competitive cheer has led to some softening of this position. For example, in a formal letter written in the year 2000, National Coordinator of Title IX Athletics for the Office of Civil Rights Dr. Mary Frances O’Shea explained her department’s new position that “although there is a presumption that cheerleading is not a sport, determinations will be made on a case-by-case basis.”
Applying O’Shea’s standard, it now seems possible that a school such as the University of Maryland may count its male and female “competitive cheer” team members as varsity athletes for purposes of complying with Title IX. This view is supported not only by the nature of the activity of competitive cheer, but also by the fact that members of the University of Maryland’s competitive cheer team enjoy equal benefits to Maryland’s other varsity athletes, including scholarships, their own locker rooms, a team trainer, and extra educational support. This conclusion is also supported by evidence that University of Maryland’s “competitive cheer” team is entirely separate from the school’s more traditional rooting cheerleaders.
By contrast, courts would be less likely to allow a school such as Seton Hall University to count their cheerleaders as varsity athletes for Title IX purposes. This is because, according to the account of one recent Seton Hall varsity cheerleader, her school does not distinguish between its competitive cheerleaders and its spirit squad. Moreover, even though the Seton Hall cheerleaders are varsity athletes in title, according to at least one former cheerleader they historically have been “denied any of the privileges of the athlete community.”
___________________________________________________________________
Marc Edelman is a Visiting Assistant Professor at Rutgers School of Law-Camden. He will be joining the faculty of Barry Law School in Fall 2009. His bio is available here, and his publications, here.




Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
Go Terps.
FIGHT ON!!
SC's song girls are beat. Replace that pic with something else.
Marc Edelman is an attorney, author, business consultant, and professor, with an expertise in the fields of sports business and law.
Marc began his professional career with the Major Indoor Soccer League, where he was responsible for soliciting new investors, rewriting the league rule book, and enforcing the league's corporate bylaws. After attending law school, Marc joined the New York office of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom LLP, where he practiced antitrust law. In May 2006, Marc joined the commercial litigation group of Dewey & LeBoeuf, where his focus shifted to entertainment and sports. Most recently, in March 2008, Marc launched his own legal practice.
Currently, Marc is on the faculty at New York Law School, Seton Hall University, and Manhattanville College. As a professor, Marc regularly earns highest honors for his teaching in the areas of sports law, business law, sports economics, and business ethics. Marc's research involves the cross-section between sports league self-governance and federal government oversight. In this capacity, Marc is often cited about how antitrust law’s single-entity defense—as well as its non-statutory labor exemption—should apply to sports.
Outside of the classroom, Marc is a regular columnist at Above the Law and a frequent guest columnist at Sports Business Journal. Marc is founder of the website www.SportsJudge.com, consultant to various sports businesses, and involved with the volunteer organization New York Cares.
Marc earned his undergraduate degree in economics from the Wharton School and his advanced degrees in both law and sports management from the University of Michigan. He is a life-long New York Mets fan, and an enthusiast of 80s music and the television show Seinfeld.
Whatever the context of the statute might be, it would be pretty insulting to cheerleaders if some judge said that its is not a sport.
Professional Sex Team.
William Van Alstyne once queried whether schools could designate their varsity football teams as co-educational. Some schools have already had female kickers. Are you with me? But, of course you are. To be sure, a university could hold open try outs and allow females to compete for spots on the football squad. All that Title IX requires is that an equal number of scholarships are available. It is the football programs and their large number of scholarships, that put pressure on universities to add so many female sports teams, but if the football program were co-ed and those scholarships did not count as male scholarships, the schools could avoid having to field so many female teams while still complying with Title IX. Do you see it? Of course you do.
William Van Alstyne once queried whether schools could designate their varsity football teams as co-educational. Some schools have already had female kickers. Are you with me? But, of course you are. To be sure, a university could hold open try outs and allow females to compete for spots on the football squad. All that Title IX requires is that an equal number of scholarships are available. It is the football programs and their large number of scholarships, that put pressure on universities to add so many female sports teams, but if the football program were co-ed and those scholarships did not count as male scholarships, the schools could avoid having to field so many female teams while still complying with Title IX. Do you see it? Of course you do.
What in the world could that ungodly pressure on my sphincter possibly be?
Frankly my dears, I don't give a damn as long as ATL keeps posting cheerleader pictures. Bring it on!
You mean, coitus?
you need to research more carefully - your pictures are both of dance teams, not competitive cheerleaders
And cheerleading has already been found to be a sport in other states, including IL (according to the Illinois High School Sports Association) and the schools there are subject to Title IX issues and IHSA varsity athletics rules.
Marc, if you could please use these pics as your "clip art" on all future posts that would be great.
What does USC stand for? Should I start to be offended?
Cheer stunts in slo-mo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqAkx_brIC4
Proof that cheerleading is a sport:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
12, Marc and I don't care what they are: if these dancers want to be counted towards Title IX's requirements, they can borrow my robe. Nice work on the film references, LUA. would you mind branching out tho?
first to say, hoTTT.
I am offended by sphincter pressure comments. Please expel.
USC stands for the University of Second Choice.
The pressure is almost unbearable. This is why we earn the big money.
First to say these pictures beat the hell out of the old clipart. Speaking of beating . . .
7,
In my understanding, football is usually exempt from Title IX reporting.
Anyone have a more detailed and specific application to football?
Damn, those pics make me so horny. Can't wait to go home and jerk off.
I find my incredibly hairy palms offensive.
After seeing that picture, I wish I had gone to USC.
Why does any of this matter? The issue for most athletic departments is monetary. Cheer scholarships aren't cheaper, and cheering probably isn't a revenue generating sport.
27--It matters because schools are going to have cheer teams to support the atmosphere. They are already paying for those coaches, uniforms and in some cases offering some scholarships. If they can count those as athletic scholarships for Title IX, they can cut their 4-17 softball team or their womens crew team ect.
Fight on SC! (and dear editor, the SC song girls don't do stunts)
Title IX intended to promote equity between male and female athletes. Cheerleading, by its nature, doesn't encourage that equity. I know, I know - there are male cheerleaders, it requires a lot of skill, strength, and athleticism, but its primary purpose is to rile up the crowd and players via being cute and peppy. Cheerleaders are, for the most part, entirely ancillary to male athletes, which was precisely what Title IX was trying to avoid.
You can't spell suck without USC.
OMG 31 that is awesome! LOL * 1,000!!!
Congrats on the tenure-track appointment, Edelman. Those are hard gigs to come by, especially in this market.
USC and Oregon - ATL going 2 for 2 for the Pac-10: Conference of Champions (and Cheerleaders?)
30 - while the UniversiTTTy of SouTTThern California is beat, the song girls are hardly "ancillary."
Could this mean I'll get to see Corky in a cheerleading outfit?
#30 obviously never saw "Bring it On."
UniversiTTTy of SouTTTh CenTTTral
UniversiTTTy of Spoiled Children
#26, good call. Given how USC Cheerleaders are notorious for erroneously cheering for the opposition, I bet you could trick a few of those blondies into bed.
OMG a school that has "T"s in it becomes "TTT"!!!! Original and sooooo hilarious! Why not at 4 T's? Or how about 5? Or can you not count that high? Because you went to UCLA?
Really? University of South Central? University of Second Choice? Can't spell SUCK without USC? You still consider those clever?
umm, so where are the legal feminists? are there any pretty blonde feminists?
I just got done having special "alone time" after looking at the pictures that accompanied this post. Did I miss anything? Holy crap, what day is it?