The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (Alabama, Georgia, Florida) in Joseph v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia recently ruled on whether Title IX provides a private right of action for employment discrimination. Two former employees sued Georgia Tech for their respective dismissals from the University, including for claims of sex discrimination under Title IX.

In determining whether the plaintiffs’ Title IX claims should proceed, the court first recognized that the issue before it was “whether the rights and remedies under Title VII preclude claims for employment discrimination under Title IX. Our sister circuits are split on that question.” (with the 5th and 7th Circuits saying that Title VII precluded Title IX claims and the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 10th saying that it did not). The 11th Circuit then joined the 5th and 7th Circuits in determining that the remedies provided for by Title VII preclude a private cause of action for employment discrimination under Title IX.

The Court focused its analysis on the fact that Title IX was enacted under the Spending Clause and that “the typical remedy for noncompliance with federally imposed conditions [such as under Title IX] is not a private cause of action . . . but rather action by the Federal Government to terminate funds.” It also distinguished precedent that permits a private cause of action under Title IX for students. Students have an implied right for a private cause of action under Title IX because otherwise they “have no statutory remedy to enforce their substantive right.” In contrast, employment discrimination claims are “expressly provided for and regulated by Title VII” and therefore do not also need to have Title IX as a means to enforce a private right.

For all the latest on legal developments under Title IX, be sure to bookmark ICS’ 2024 Title IX Regulations resource page and join us on January 21 for our free Year-End Review webinar.