# Title IX *Federal civil rights statute prohibiting sex discrimination in federally funded education programs (20 U.S.C. §§ 1681–1688)* Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 is the federal statute that bars discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.[^1] It became law as Public Law No. 92-318, 86 Stat. 235, which President Richard Nixon signed on June 23, 1972.[^2] It is codified at 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681–1688.[^3] In the Minnesota record, the statute is the basis of two federal actions against state bodies. On September 30, 2025, the [[Office for Civil Rights]] of the [[U.S. Department of Education]] and the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health and Human Services issued a Title IX noncompliance finding against the [[Minnesota Department of Education]] (MDE) and the [[Minnesota State High School League]] (MSHSL). They referred the matter to the [[United States Department of Justice]].[^4][^5] On March 30, 2026, the United States sued MDE and MSHSL in the District of Minnesota, No. 0:26-cv-02078. The instrument the complaint challenges is the MSHSL and MDE eligibility policies and Minn. Stat. §128C.02.[^6] The suit is active as of the record.[^7] The statute's text sits beside its enforcement record. The Education Department's Office for Civil Rights has one punitive measure: withdrawal of a school's federal funding. Wikipedia's account reports that this sanction had never been used as of 2022.[^2] In April 2026 the Eighth Circuit ruled in a private Minnesota Title IX case. It stated that executive guidance and agency findings "do not reflect settled law," and that whether Title IX permits transgender participation "remains an open question of law."[^8] ## Text The statute's opening sentence is followed by exceptions and clarifications. It reads: "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."[^1][^3] The original text does not name athletics, though the law's public profile has centered on school and college sports.[^2] ## Historical background Senator Birch Bayh wrote the provision's first 37 words. He offered them as an amendment to the Higher Education Act on August 6, 1971, and again on February 28, 1972, when the Senate adopted the amendment.[^2] In the House, Representative Edith Green, chair of the Subcommittee on Education, had held hearings on discrimination against women. She introduced a bill on May 11, 1972, and Congress completed passage on June 8, 1972.[^2] After Representative Patsy Mink died in 2002, the law was renamed the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act. Women were 42 percent of U.S. college enrollment in 1972.[^2] The provision closed a gap left by the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]]. [[Title VII]] addressed employment but not education, and [[Title VI]] covered race, color and national origin in federally funded programs but not sex.[^2] Wikipedia's account traces a precursor to a 1967 executive order of President [[Lyndon Johnson]] against discrimination in federal contracts. It also records that Congress rejected an amendment by John Tower that would have exempted revenue-generating sports.[^2] In 1988 Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act (S. 557, 100th Congress). The act overrode *Grove City College v. Bell* and restored broad Title IX coverage.[^9] ## Regulation and enforcement Each funding agency has its own implementing rules: 34 C.F.R. Part 106 for the Department of Education,[^10] 28 C.F.R. Part 54 for the Department of Justice,[^11] and 7 C.F.R. Part 15a for the Department of Agriculture.[^12] The Education Department's Office for Civil Rights is the federal Title IX enforcer.[^13] The Justice Department's Civil Rights Division pursues co-enforcement through its Educational Opportunities Section.[^14] For athletics, the Office for Civil Rights first set requirements in 1979 and later added clarifications. A school must meet at least one of three tests: proportional participation by sex, a record of expanding opportunities for the underrepresented sex, or accommodation of that sex's interests.[^2][^15] In 2011 the American Sports Council sued the Department of Education. It sought a declaration that the participation test applies only to colleges and universities, not high schools.[^2] Federal funds carrying a Title IX assurance include Pell Grants.[^16] They also include the CACFP and SFSP funds that the USDA [[Food and Nutrition Service]] passes through MDE.[^17] Recipients are bound by the single-audit requirements of 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Subpart F.[^18] ## Protections for transgender students Federal readings of the statute have changed between administrations. Under the Obama administration, the Department of Education issued guidance in 2011 on schools' duty to treat sexual assault as a Title IX matter. Later guidance stated that transgender students are protected from sex-based discrimination and directed schools to treat them consistent with their gender identity.[^2] In February 2017, under the Trump administration, the Departments of Justice and Education withdrew the gender-identity guidance; the departments were then led by Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. On February 12, 2018, the Education Department announced that Title IX did not allow transgender students to use bathrooms matching their gender identity.[^2] [[Bostock v. Clayton County]] was decided on June 15, 2020, by a 6–3 vote, with Justice Gorsuch writing. It held that Title VII's bar on discrimination "because of sex" reaches sexual orientation and gender identity.[^19] The Department of Education extended that reasoning to Title IX in a notice of interpretation published June 22, 2021, at 86 Fed. Reg. 32637.[^20] It then codified the extension in a Title IX final rule dated April 19, 2024.[^21] ## Judicial interpretation [[Cannon v. University of Chicago]] (1979) recognized an implied private right of action under Title IX.[^22] *Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools* (1992) allowed compensatory damages for intentional violations.[^23] *Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education* (1999) placed student-on-student harassment within the statute's reach.[^24] *Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education* (2005) held that the statute bars retaliation against people who complain of sex discrimination.[^25] *Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee* (2009) held that Title IX does not preclude §1983 equal-protection suits over the same conduct.[^26] *Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C.* (2022) held that emotional-distress damages are unavailable under Spending Clause statutes, including Title IX.[^27] Two courts of appeals have also ruled on Title IX claims. The en banc Eleventh Circuit ruled on school bathroom access under the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX in *Adams ex rel. Kasper v. School Board of St. Johns County* (2022).[^28] The Sixth Circuit heard a Title IX and equal-protection challenge to gender-identity medical-treatment regulation in *L.W. ex rel. Williams v. Skrmetti* (2023).[^29] ## In the Minnesota record ### Who - MDE and MSHSL are the defendants in No. 0:26-cv-02078 (D. Minn.).[^6] The case is assigned to Judge [[Eric C. Tostrud]].[^30] - The Education Department and HHS Offices for Civil Rights issued the September 30, 2025 finding against MDE and MSHSL.[^4] - [[St. Cloud State University]] was the defendant in *Portz v. St. Cloud State University*, an earlier Title IX athletics case.[^31] ### What - The complaint alleges that the MSHSL and MDE eligibility policies, and Minn. Stat. §128C.02, violate Title IX.[^6] The Justice Department announced the suit in release No. 26-299.[^32] - The ED–HHS finding (OCR 05254060 et al.) concluded that MDE and MSHSL violated Title IX and referred the matter to the Justice Department.[^4][^33] The finding is an agency determination on the preponderance standard. The complaint states allegations, and no court has ruled on their merits.[^4][^6] - The project's master record checked §128C.02 against the live statute. It records that subdivision 4 reads "Rules are APA exempt" and names the filed complaint as a second primary source for the statute.[^6] ### When - August 1, 2019: in *Portz*, a federal district court found a Title IX participation-opportunities violation at St. Cloud State.[^31] - July 6, 2020: the court held the university in contempt for restricting the women's tennis team's access to coaching and competition. It awarded $10,000 to each of two women's teams.[^31] - October 28, 2021: the Eighth Circuit (Nos. 19-2921 and 20-1366) affirmed the participation violation. It reversed the treatment-and-benefits findings and vacated an attorney-fee award exceeding $1 million.[^34][^35] - September 30, 2025: ED and HHS issued their finding against MDE and MSHSL.[^4] - March 30, 2026: the United States filed No. 0:26-cv-02078.[^6] - April 15, 2026: the Eighth Circuit decided *[[Female Athletes United v. Ellison]]*, No. 25-2899.[^8] ### Where - No. 0:26-cv-02078 is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of [[Minnesota]].[^7][^30] ### How - The project's master record dates the oldest layer of the challenged instrument to the Anderson administration (1973) and the second Perpich administration (1989). It records that the Walz administration was operating the instrument when the suit was filed.[^6] ## Active matters - ***[[United States v. Minnesota Department of Education and Minnesota State High School League (Title IX)]]***, No. 0:26-cv-02078 (D. Minn.), filed March 30, 2026. The suit concerns the MSHSL and MDE eligibility policies and Minn. Stat. §128C.02, and its status as of the record is active.[^6][^30] The project's steelman dossiers caption the same docket *United States v. State of Minnesota*. This article uses the caption in the case register.[^6] - ***[[ED OCR and HHS OCR Title IX noncompliance finding against MDE and MSHSL]]***, OCR 05254060 et al., issued September 30, 2025, and referred to the Justice Department.[^4][^5] ## Related federal actions and rulings - ***[[Female Athletes United v. Ellison]]***, No. 25-2899 (8th Cir., April 15, 2026). The panel was Judge Gruender, writing, with Judges Erickson and Grasz. It affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against MSHSL policy.[^8] - The court found that the plaintiff group had standing. It held that Title IX supplies a private right of action only for intentional sex discrimination, applying [[Alexander v. Sandoval]] through *Cannon*.[^8] - It found that the group's claims "sound in disparate impact," which carry no private right of action.[^8] - It noted the pending *West Virginia v. B.P.J.*, No. 24-43, and *[[Little v. Hecox]]*, No. 24-38.[^8] - ***[[United States v. State of Minnesota (0:26-cv-00273)]]***, filed January 14, 2026. This earlier suit was brought under Title VII, not Title IX. Its complaint cites Minn. Stat. § 43A.191 eight times, including subd. 3(c), which requires an agency to explain why it hired a non-affirmative candidate.[^36] The Justice Department announced it in release No. 26-21, titled *United States Department of Justice Files Lawsuit Against Minnesota's 'Affirmative Action' Regime*. Attorney General Pamela Bondi certified the case as a matter of general public importance.[^37] ## Notes [^1]: Legal Information Institute, *20 U.S.C. § 1681* — text of Title IX prohibiting exclusion or discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded education programs. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1681 [^2]: Wikipedia, *Title IX* (revision 1380708986, retrieved Oct. 26, 2026) — enactment date, public law, legislative history, background, OCR athletics tests, administration guidance, and enforcement criticism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_IX [^3]: Office of the Law Revision Counsel, *United States Code, Title 20, Chapter 38* — codification of Title IX at 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title20/chapter38&edition=prelim [^4]: U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Offices for Civil Rights, *Minnesota Title IX Findings* (Sept. 30, 2025) — noncompliance finding against MDE and MSHSL, OCR 05254060 et al. https://www.ed.gov/media/document/ed-hhs-minnesota-title-ix-findings-112441.pdf [^5]: U.S. Department of Education, *U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Find Minnesota Violated Title IX* (press release, Sept. 2025) — announcement of the finding. https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-and-us-department-of-health-and-human-services-find-minnesota-violated-title-ix [^6]: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, *Complaint, United States v. Minnesota Department of Education and Minnesota State High School League*, No. 0:26-cv-02078 (D. Minn., filed Mar. 30, 2026) — defendants, challenged instrument (MSHSL/MDE eligibility policies; Minn. Stat. §128C.02) and allegations. https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1433251/dl [^7]: Public Access to Court Electronic Records, *Docket, United States v. Minnesota Department of Education*, No. 0:26-cv-02078 (D. Minn.) — docket access for the active Title IX action. https://pacer.uscourts.gov/ [^8]: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, *Female Athletes United v. Ellison*, No. 25-2899 (Apr. 15, 2026) — opinion affirming denial of preliminary injunction; standing found; no private Title IX disparate-impact right of action. https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/04/252899P.pdf [^9]: Congress.gov, *S. 557, Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1988* (100th Congress) — act overriding *Grove City College v. Bell* and restoring broad Title IX coverage. https://www.congress.gov/bill/100th-congress/senate-bill/557 [^10]: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, *34 C.F.R. Part 106* — Department of Education Title IX implementing regulation. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-106 [^11]: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, *28 C.F.R. Part 54* — Department of Justice Title IX implementing regulation. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-28/chapter-I/part-54 [^12]: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, *7 C.F.R. Part 15a* — USDA Title IX implementing regulation. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-A/part-15a [^13]: U.S. Department of Education, *Office for Civil Rights* — federal Title IX enforcement homepage. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/index.html [^14]: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, *Educational Opportunities Section* — section pursuing Title IX co-enforcement. https://www.justice.gov/crt/educational-opportunities-section [^15]: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, *Title IX athletics clarification* — athletic guidance. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/clarific.html [^16]: U.S. Department of Education, Federal Student Aid, *Federal Pell Grants* — federal funding subject to Title IX assurance. https://studentaid.gov/understand-aid/types/grants/pell [^17]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, *CACFP* — CACFP/SFSP pass-through to MDE, subject to Title IX assurance. https://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp [^18]: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, *2 C.F.R. Part 200* (Uniform Guidance) — Subpart F single-audit requirements. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200 [^19]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Bostock v. Clayton County*, 590 U.S. 644 (June 15, 2020) — Title VII sex discrimination includes sexual orientation and gender identity. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/590/644/ [^20]: U.S. Department of Education, *Enforcement of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 With Respect to Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Light of Bostock v. Clayton County*, 86 Fed. Reg. 32637 (June 22, 2021) — notice of interpretation. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/22/2021-13058/enforcement-of-title-ix-of-the-education-amendments-of-1972-with-respect-to-discrimination-based-on [^21]: U.S. Department of Education, *Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance* (final rule, Apr. 19, 2024) — Federal Register publication incorporating the *Bostock* extension. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/29/2024-07915/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal [^22]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Cannon v. University of Chicago*, 441 U.S. 677 (1979) — implied private right of action under Title IX. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/441/677/ [^23]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools*, 503 U.S. 60 (1992) — compensatory damages for intentional Title IX violations. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/503/60/ [^24]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education*, 526 U.S. 629 (1999) — student-on-student harassment within Title IX reach. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/526/629/ [^25]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education*, 544 U.S. 167 (2005) — Title IX prohibits retaliation. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/544/167/ [^26]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee*, 555 U.S. 246 (2009) — Title IX does not preclude §1983 equal-protection actions. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/555/246/ [^27]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C.*, 596 U.S. 212 (2022) — emotional-distress damages unavailable under Spending Clause statutes, including Title IX. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/596/212/ [^28]: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (en banc), *Adams ex rel. Kasper v. School Board of St. Johns County*, 57 F.4th 791 (Dec. 30, 2022) — bathroom-access ruling under Equal Protection and Title IX. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca11/18-13592/18-13592-2022-12-30.html [^29]: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, *L.W. ex rel. Williams v. Skrmetti*, 83 F.4th 460 (Sept. 28, 2023) — Title IX and equal-protection challenge to gender-identity medical-treatment regulation. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca6/23-5600/23-5600-2023-09-28.html [^30]: Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, *United States v. Minnesota Department of Education* (Title IX), No. 0:26-cv-02078 — assigned judge and status (tracker). https://clearinghouse.net/case/48004/ [^31]: AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund, *Portz v. St. Cloud State University* — district-court participation finding (Aug. 1, 2019), contempt order (July 6, 2020), and $10,000 awards to two women's teams. https://www.aauw.org/resources/legal/laf/current-cases__trashed/portz-v-scsu/ [^32]: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, *Justice Department Sues Minnesota* (release No. 26-299, Mar. 30, 2026) — announcement of the Title IX suit. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-minnesota-protect-girls-sports-and-intimate-spaces [^33]: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, *OCR: ED and HHS Find Minnesota Violates Title IX* (press release, Sept. 2025) — HHS announcement of the joint finding. https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/ocr-ed-hhs-find-mn-violates-title-nine.html [^34]: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, *Portz v. St. Cloud State University*, No. 19-2921 (Oct. 28, 2021) — affirming the participation violation and reversing the treatment-and-benefits findings. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/19-2921/19-2921-2021-10-28.html [^35]: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, *Portz v. St. Cloud State University*, No. 20-1366 (Oct. 28, 2021) — vacating the attorney-fee award. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/20-1366/20-1366-2021-10-28.html [^36]: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, *Complaint, United States v. State of Minnesota*, No. 0:26-cv-00273 (D. Minn., filed Jan. 14, 2026) — Title VII action citing Minn. Stat. § 43A.191 eight times, including subd. 3(c). https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1423361/dl [^37]: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, *United States Department of Justice Files Lawsuit Against Minnesota's 'Affirmative Action' Regime* (release No. 26-21, Jan. 14, 2026) — title of the release and the Attorney General's certification. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-department-justice-files-lawsuit-against-minnesotas-affirmative-action-regime