Dear EIA members,
On July 19, 2007, Equity in Athletics (EIA), James Madison University (JMU), and the U.S. Department of Education appeared before Judge Conrad for a hearing on EIA’s motion for a preliminary injunction against JMU’s plans to cut ten athletic teams for the 2007-08 academic year. At the end of the hearing, Judge Conrad took EIA’s motion under advisement and indicated that he would try to prepare a decision in approximately two weeks.
Today marks two weeks from the hearing, so a decision could be imminent. On the other hand, the hearing transcript likely will not be complete until approximately August 10, which could hold up a decision. Whenever it comes down, EIA will send a further email release to its members to explain the Court’s decision.
At the hearing, Judge Conrad seemed cautious about ordering a school how to run its affairs, stepping in when Congress has not, and second-guessing the many courts that have ruled for Title IX’s “Three-Part Test,” which JMU used to justify the athletic cuts. He also recognized that EIA’s attack on the Three-Part Test’s procedural validity was an important difference between EIA’s case and those other cases.
Yesterday, to address Judge Conrad’s concerns that arose during the hearing, EIA filed a motion seeking the Court’s leave to file a post-hearing brief. JMU indicated it would oppose EIA’s motion to file the brief unless JMU had 30 days to respond. Because the school year will have begun in 30 days, EIA characterized JMU’s 30-day condition as no different than outright opposition. A little more than 30 minutes into JMU’s 30 days, Judge Conrad granted EIA’s motion to file its post-hearing brief.
In doing so, Judge Conrad told us something that we already knew (that he is a fair, no-nonsense judge) but nothing about how he intends to rule on EIA’s motion for a preliminary injunction. At a minimum, his accepting EIA’s brief ensures EIA a complete record for an appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals if he denies the injunction. At the other extreme, the brief may help convince him to grant the preliminary injunction.
At the hearing on July 19, JMU’s 2006-07 track captain, Jennifer Chapman, ’07 was EIA’s star witness, although her star power shown through after EIA attorney Doug Schneebeck, ’82 (JMU’s 1981-82 track captain) finished his questioning. She asked Judge Conrad if she could say a few words and then proceeded to implore Judge Conrad to recognize the injustice of these cuts and to “be the change,” a JMU slogan that JMU’s student athletes have adopted as their own. “In more than 20 years as a litigator, I have never seen anything like that,” Schneebeck said. “Whatever your views on this debate, Jenn is a credit to JMU.”
After the Court rules on EIA’s motion for a preliminary injunction, EIA will explain the ruling to its members in a follow-up email. For now, we know that Judge Conrad listened to what all the parties had to say, and it appears that his decision could go either way. Significantly, a preliminary injunction is a tentative ruling, so even if he denies the motion, EIA still could win on the merits later in the school year.
Prayers are welcome,
Equity in Athletics (info@equityinathletics.org)
Note if you would like more info on or to join the EIA go to: