Federal Judge Tells Stephen F. Austin to Reinstate Women’s Sports Teams

On Friday, a federal judge approved a preliminary injunction immediately halting the ability for Stephen F. Austin State University’s athletic department to cut three women’s Olympic sports teams—or any others. 

The decision suggests that federal courts may not allow schools to follow through on threats of sports cuts to fund revenue-sharing and scholarships now allowed by the House v. NCAA settlement. And sports that have already been cut could be reinstated through litigation. The reason: Title IX, the law that has come to require universities to offer equal sports opportunities for men’ s and women’s athletes. 

In May, Stephen F. Austin announced that it would cut women’s beach volleyball, bowling, and golf programs (as well as men’s golf). Players sought legal counsel from renowned Title IX attorney Arthur Bryant, who has a years-long track record of getting college sports programs reinstated through Title IX lawsuits. They sent a letter to the school requesting that the teams be reinstated on Title IX grounds, and filed a lawsuit over the sports cuts on June 30.

The injunction requires that the school keep the programs intact for now—though Stephen F. Austin said it would appeal the injunction with a federal district court. The judge’s opinion also noted that the case had a “likelihood of success on the merits,” suggesting that the judge foresees potential for the players to prove that the school has violated the Title IX statute.

In its press release announcing the cut, the school acknowledged that the decision was linked to financial burdens caused by the House settlement. “SFA joins a growing number of institutions across the country that have decided to discontinue athletic teams, citing the financial pressures tied to the changing college athletics landscape, including the looming $2.8 billion House vs. NCAA settlement.” In court documents, the school argued it would save about $1 million annually without these sports.

“SFA made an intentional, considered business decision to eliminate women’s teams when its own Title IX consultant had already told SFA it was violating the law and needed to add women’s teams,” Bryant said in a statement. “That’s sex discrimination, plain and simple.” 

Women’s sports faced similar threats during the pandemic, when schools across Division I cut women’s programs because of financial losses due to COVID-19. Through litigation (and, sometimes, just the threat of litigation), Bryant was able to get many of these programs reinstated between 2020 and 2021. In many cases, men’s Olympic sports programs that were cut were also reinstated by the schools. 

Many of the sports cuts in the post-House settlement era could follow a similar pattern as during COVID-19. Schools still have to abide by Title IX no matter how much money they make or lose—and regardless of new financial burdens including the House settlement. Cutting sports may not be a legal way to trim their budgets.