Title XI is a civil rights matter? And clearly states at a federally funded school you cannot discriminate against sex, race, religion or origin. I'm not arguing with you btw, I'm just simply having conversation. So don't take my responses as rude
Title IX - Wikipedia
Title IX is a federal civil rights law in the United States of America that was passed as part of the Education Amendments of 1972. This is Public Law No. 92‑318, 86 Stat. 235 (June 23, 1972), codified at 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681–1688.
Feminists during the early 1970s lobbied Congress to add sex as a protected class category. Title IX was enacted to fill this gap and prohibit discrimination in all federally funded education programs. Congressman John Tower then proposed an amendment to Title IX that would have exempted athletics departments from the scope of Title IX's coverage. The Tower amendment was rejected, but it led to widespread misunderstanding of Title IX as a sports-equity law, rather than an anti-discrimination, civil rights law.
The key word in your above comment is education. Here is the actual text of Title IX:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
That statement covers access to education programs. It is much broader than sports but sports (which in college as treated as a kind of education program) became a key part of the equation because women, did not have the same access to athletic programs as men at almost all colleges and universities.
So let's think about title IX in its broader application. If UT said to a male student, who can't enroll in nursing classes because only women are allowed (or some more subtle way of discriminating against male candidates), the MALE student could sue under Title IX. Contrary to what some folks on this board choose to believe, title IX is not a communist plot specifically designed to disadvantage men. Both genders can gain protection/fair treatment under title IX, it just that historically many more doors have been closed to women than men.
Debby Jennings was A WORKPLACE discrimination suit. That is not a Title IX manner (but Title VII). It is different kind of discrimination claim with a different standard of proof.
"Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that protects employees against discrimination based on certain specified characteristics: race, color, national origin, sex, age, and religion. Under
Title VII, an employer may not discriminate with regard to any term, condition, or privilege of employment. Areas that may give rise to violations include recruiting, hiring, promoting, transferring, training, disciplining, discharging, assigning work, measuring performance, or providing benefits. Title VII applies to employers in both the private and public sectors that have 15 or more employees. It also applies to the federal government, employment agencies, and labor organizations. Title VII is enforced by the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission." [quoted from From an EEOC info page].
However, there has been much debate in the courts as to whether Title IX, in some situations, can cover workplace discrimination and this where matters gets a bit tricky. In education settings, a gender discrimination suit can by brought by faculty and staff but the logic is not oriented toward personal harm but rather redressing a structural bias. In other words, the plaintiff says "I am suing, not because I was discriminated against per se, but because my case shows that all people who share my characteristics (sex, gender identity) are systematically denied an equal opportunity and/or fair treatment. If a court agreed with the plaintiff in such a Title IX suit , the remedy could involve federal funding being withdrawn from the institution unless its make the required changes to its hiring and promotion practices. The other legal debate is whether a plaintiff can simultaneously file a suit under title VII (I was discriminated against) and Title IX (this institution, in general, discriminates against people like me). I believe the current standard is that such dual suit can be filed
I do not the know the full details of Jennings lawsuit and it is conceivable she may have also included some Title IX claims, directed at the institution, but it seems that the bulk of her grievance fell under Title VII provisions.
I will add that this discussion because one poster said that UTAD was afraid to fire Holly because she would bring a Title IX lawsuit. So, I will reiterate that firing a coach for insufficient performance is not a Title IX matter nor is it a Title VII matter. Her contract includes 36 just cause provisions, the University is covered. Folks who compare Holly's situation to Debby Jennings are either willfully ignoring or trolling.