Female Athletes who Sued Riverside Unified Scored Big Title IX Victory

Female athletes who sued the Riverside Unified School District over the boy given special preferences to play on their girls team scored a big victory last week when a federal judge ruled that their lawsuit for Title IX violations can proceed.

Taylor Starling and Kaitlyn Slavin, cross-country runners at Martin Luther King High School in Riverside County, had argued that the school allowed the unqualified boy who identifies as female on an elite varsity team because he is transgender.

Additionally, Slavin was bounced from the team to make room for the boy, who had missed the required practices for the team.

United States District Court for the Central District of California Judge Sunshine Sykes ruled that, “Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged they have suffered an injury by way of their alleged deprivation of the “opportunity to compete in fair and non-discriminatory high school” cross country competition guaranteed by Title IX. This type of injury can be remedied by money damages.”

Advocates for Faith and Freedom lawyer Julianne Flesicher, who is representing the athletes, told the California Globe that, “This ruling is a resounding victory that strikes at the heart of the plaintiffs’ Title IX claims. This decision keeps alive our Title IX challenge, recognizing the real harm to girls’ athletic opportunities when gender identity policies create unequal treatment based on sex. This is a significant win because it reinforces that Title IX isn’t a one-way street—it must shield all girls from sex-based discrimination, including when state laws like AB 1266 systematically disadvantage biological females in sports.”

AB 1226 is the controversial California law that has allowed boys to invade girls sports. It says students can play on whichever sports team  that is consistent with their asserted gender identity. Never mind biological realities.

The lawsuit had challenged the mere enforcement of AB 1226 as a violation of Title IX. But Judge Sykes dismissed that claim with leave to amend, meaning it can be refiled.

She said the plaintiffs need to flesh out their argument.

“Plaintiffs make the conclusory statement that “AB 1266 permits M.L., a biological male, to participate in female sports and use female spaces, thereby, violating the federal protections of Title IX.” To the extent that Plaintiffs are attempting to plead some type of facial or preemption-based challenge to AB 1266, they must do in a separate claim and cannot sneak it in with a few conclusory allegations at the end of a claim that spends the previous thirty paragraphs discussing an entirely different course of conduct (School Defendants’ allegedly discriminatory treatment of the cisgender participants of the cross-country team).”

“To the extent Plaintiffs are trying to argue that State Defendants somehow participated in or sanctioned [the coach’s] allegedly favorable treatment of M.L., Plaintiffs’ must explain how the passage of AB 1266 and State Defendants’ actions specifically led to the conduct discussed in their complaint.”

Although Sykes allowed the claim for illegal intentional discrimination under Title IX to proceed,  she dismissed with leave to amend another Title IX claim in the lawsuit that the mere presence of the boy on the girls team violated the law’s  requirement that boys and girls sports teams have “equal accommodation”–meaning sufficient opportunities for participation.

The Joe Biden appointee wrote that, “There are simply not enough facts alleged in the complaint to suggest that the participation of a single transgender athlete at Martin Luther King” has impacted “participation opportunities available for female athletes at Martin Luther King High School or in the State.  As such, Plaintiffs have failed to [establish] an equal accommodation claim.”

The lawsuit also includes a claim that the Martin Luther King High School athletic director violated the girls’ First Amendment rights because she did not allow them to wear shirts that said “Save Girls Sports.”

That claim, along with the assertion of Title IX violations for intentional discrimination, can continue to be litigated.

Meanwhile, a similar lawsuit was filed early last month by three Jurupa Valley High School athletes  over the presence of a predatory boy, who identifies as female, on their track and volleyball teams. One of the plaintiffs has since graduated from the school.

Advocates for Faith and Freedom lawyer Julianne Fleischer is also representing these female athletes in their federal lawsuit against the Jurupa Valley Unified School District and the California Department of Education for Title IX violation and sexual harassment.

According to the complaint, the boy was allowed into the girls locker room,  where he gawked at the plaintiffs, Elsewhere, he  continually groped their behinds, and made crude remarks about his  “custom coochie.”

When the girls complained to school officials about the boy’s behavior they were threatened with sanctions if they continued to object to his presence on the team or in the locker room.

The federal lawsuit says that, “Defendants have knowingly permitted a male student to compete on the JVHS varsity girls’ track and field and volleyball teams, access female locker rooms and bathrooms, and engage in harassing conduct toward female athletes. As a result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have suffered sex discrimination, including sexual harassment, unsafe and unfair athletic environments, viewpoint discrimination, and infringements on their religious liberty and safety. These actions have deprived them of equal opportunities and their civil rights guaranteed by Title IX, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the First Amendment.”

Julianne Fleischer said via email that, “the most important principle at stake in this lawsuit is the preservation of truth, safety, and dignity for young female athletes. This case goes beyond high school sports; it’s about protecting our girls from the consequences of California’s woke gender policies. These young athletes are standing up to ensure that female sports remain a space where girls can thrive with fairness and respect.

“There’s an ongoing pattern of schools prioritizing compliance with state laws at the expense of the federal protections afforded to female students under Title IX,” she continued. “But the simple truth is this: the rights of female students are not second class. These rights should be protected and fought for.”

Spokeswomen for the Jurupa Unified School District and the Riverside Unified School District did not reply to requests for comment.