# Cannon v. University of Chicago *U.S. Supreme Court decision, 441 U.S. 677 (1979), on an implied private right of action under Title VI and Title IX* *Cannon v. University of Chicago*, 441 U.S. 677 (1979), is a United States Supreme Court decision cited for an implied private cause of action under Title VI, and under [[Title IX]], for the conduct the statute prohibits.[^1] The Minnesota record cites it under two legal theories. One is race discrimination in federally funded programs under Title VI. The other is sex discrimination in federally funded education programs under Title IX, where it is cited for an implied private right of action.[^1] In *[[Female Athletes United v. Ellison]]*, No. 25-2899, filed April 15, 2026, the Eighth Circuit applied *[[Alexander v. Sandoval]]*, 532 U.S. 275 (2001), through *Cannon*. On that basis it held that Title IX supplies a private right of action only for intentional sex discrimination.[^2] ## Holding as cited The decision appears in volume 441 of the United States Reports, beginning at page 677, and was decided in 1979.[^1] Under the Title IX theory, the record cites it for an implied private right of action under Title IX. Under the Title VI theory, it is cited for an implied private cause of action under Title VI (and Title IX) for the conduct the statute prohibits.[^1] The record does not set out the facts of the underlying suit, the Court's vote, or the opinion's author.[^1] ## Later application An Eighth Circuit panel of Judge Gruender, writing with Judges Erickson and Grasz, affirmed the district court's denial of Female Athletes United's (FAU) motion for a preliminary injunction.[^2] The panel held that FAU had standing because a member identified as "Athlete 1" faced a scheduled game against the transgender athlete.[^2] Applying *Alexander v. Sandoval* through *Cannon*, the court held that Title IX provides a private right of action only for intentional sex discrimination.[^2] It found that FAU's ineffective-accommodation and unequal-treatment claims "sound in disparate impact," for which no private right of action exists. FAU had conceded at argument: "we don't contest that there is no disparate impact claim under Title IX."[^2] The panel added that executive guidance and agency findings "do not reflect settled law."[^2] It described whether Title IX permits transgender participation as a question that "remains an open question of law." In doing so, it noted the pending cases *West Virginia v. B.P.J.*, No. 24-43, and *[[Little v. Hecox]]*, No. 24-38.[^2] An earlier characterization, drawn from the Minnesota Attorney General's press release, described the loss as one on standing. The opinion affirmed standing and decided the appeal on the private right of action.[^2] ## In the Minnesota record ### What - *Cannon* is cited for an implied private right of action under Title IX. It is also cited for an implied private cause of action under Title VI for the conduct the statute prohibits.[^1] - In *Female Athletes United v. Ellison*, the Eighth Circuit relied on *Cannon* in affirming the denial of FAU's preliminary injunction.[^2] ### When - *Cannon* was decided in 1979.[^1] - The Eighth Circuit's opinion in No. 25-2899 was filed on April 15, 2026.[^2] ### How - The Eighth Circuit applied *Alexander v. Sandoval* through *Cannon* to confine Title IX private suits to intentional sex discrimination. It then treated FAU's claims as disparate-impact claims outside that right.[^2] ## See also - [[Female Athletes United v. Ellison]] - [[Alexander v. Sandoval]] - [[Little v. Hecox]] - [[Title IX]] ## Notes [^1]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Cannon v. University of Chicago*, 441 U.S. 677 (1979) — reporter citation and year; cited for an implied private right of action under Title IX, and under Title VI (and IX) for the conduct the statute prohibits. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/441/677/ [^2]: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, *Female Athletes United v. Ellison*, No. 25-2899 (filed Apr. 15, 2026), as excerpted verbatim in *How Minnesota Got Here* (merged master, footnoted), entry [43] — panel, affirmance, standing holding, intentional-discrimination limit via *Sandoval* and *Cannon*, disparate-impact holding, FAU's concession, and the correction of the press-release characterization. Validated primary entry; no URL for the opinion in the pack.