Judge Says State College Area School District Violated Title IX by Not Accommodating Middle School Girl Hockey Players

A judge has found that State College Area School District violated the federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in schools by not providing accommodations for middle school girls who wanted to play club ice hockey.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann on Thursday ordered a preliminary injunction requiring that three girls represented in a lawsuit against the district be rostered on an ice hockey club team and that a second team be created if need be.

“The great ice hockey player Wayne Gretzky famously said that ‘you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take,'” Brann wrote. “His quote assumes that everyone has the opportunity to play, though, and in this case, the plaintiffs have not been given the opportunity to which they are afforded under Title IX.”

SCASD spokesperson Chris Rosenblum said the district is still reviewing the decision.

“We are in the process of reviewing the Court’s decision, and the district will evaluate all of its options going forward,” he wrote in an email. “We have always strived to comply with Title IX requirements by providing equal opportunities for female students, and we will take the necessary steps to continue fulfilling that commitment.”

The club ice hockey team, which plays in the Laurel Mountain Hockey League, is operated by the Ice Hockey Club, a parent-run booster group, but is chartered and sanctioned by the school district and required to have an academic adviser employed by SCASD. According to the lawsuit, the district has no formal agreement that cedes control of the club team to the booster group.

Parents of the three girls filed the lawsuit in August after at least four female students were among the 34 who tried out for the co-ed middle school team in April. They notified the Ice Hockey Club and coach at the time that enough players tried out to form a second middle school team. They also noted that because a private youth hockey team in the area was no longer rostering girls, opportunities for female players would be limited and a second middle school club team would be the best option for accommodating them.

After the tryouts, 19 boys were chosen for the final roster, but no girls. The parents inquired again about forming a second team, but the president of the club declined, saying the decision was final because there was not sufficient available ice time at Pegula Ice Arena. A Pegula representative told the parents the arena would be happy to work on an accommodation, but that they conversation would have to be initiated by the hockey club.

According to the lawsuit, no girl over the age of 12 was rostered on any hockey team in the State College area, while boys selected for club played on as many as three teams.

The parents say they made several efforts with the club and school district officials to form a second team. They informed the club they had lined up enough players, coaches and separate ice time for a second team without impact to the club, but the proposal allegedly was rejected without a reason being given. The club allegedly instead told them if they wanted to compete for a team in the same league as the State College team they would have to travel to Altoona and play for a private Catholic school.

School district administrators made inquiries about a second team but ultimately decided that the club was controlled by a third party over which they had no authority. They also said they were not interested in sponsoring a second team independent of the Ice Hockey Club. In July, meanwhile, the district announced the formation of a high school junior varsity team to accommodate boys who did not make the high school varsity team.

The parents filed a complaint with the district and an investigation by its Title IX coordinator determined SCASD was sufficiently in compliance with the law.

Brann disagreed, writing that while schools have flexibility in designing sports programs, there was clearly interest by girls in playing hockey that the district did not meet.

“No facts indicate that the District has made any efforts to meet the female students’ interest in alternative or comparable ways—e.g., by allowing female students to practice with the team to learn skills, inviting the female students to rotate in filling ‘alternate’ spots, holding workshops or coaching sessions at the ice rink where female students can get time on the ice,” he wrote. “Instead, the evidence presented demonstrates that the female students were given no comparable opportunity to play ice hockey at the middle school level, all while the District was aware of the female students’ interest.”

The district argued that it supports creating a second middle school team if feasible, but that the parents’ proposal was not logisitcaly realistic.

Brann, however, wrote that the district did nothing to support a second team and that its argument fails in light of the parents demonstrating they had secured players, coaches and ice time.

“Ignoring the female students’ stated interest in being accommodated while seeming to relinquish this responsibility to a parent-run booster club is not supportive; it is the opposite,” he wrote.

The preliminary injunction, Brann wrote, is necessary because the girls will suffer “irreparable harm” from lost opportunities.

“Each day that passes further deprives them of that opportunity when they could otherwise be on the ice, learning critical skills,” he wrote. “No other form of relief is adequate to remedy this harm, and Plaintiffs have sufficiently demonstrated that there are no available opportunities of similar frequency and quality as the District’s club ice hockey teams in their own backyard, especially in light of the fact that the female students’ previous team had been disbanded. The Court regrets that the clock has been ticking for Plaintiffs—and this harm has accumulated—since the beginning of the school year, months ago…”

The injunction prohibits SCASD “from relinquishing any of its Title IX responsibilities to any parent-run booster club organizations” and requires the district to take measures to ensure the girls are rostered on a club ice hockey team. It orders the district to cease any efforts blocking formation of a second club team and requires SCASD to take immediate steps to recruit and promote female participation in the ice hockey club program.

Brann wrote that he found it regrettable the matter had escalated to the point of requiring judicial intervention.

“For the sake of the State College community’s wellbeing, the Court encourages all players in this case, literally and figuratively, to consider working together in resolving this matter going forward,” he wrote.