## Facts

- California State University, Bakersfield (CSUB) had an undergraduate population of about 64% women and 36% men, while men held about 61% of varsity athletic roster spots.
- CSUB faced litigation alleging unequal athletic opportunities for women under a state statute comparable to Title IX and resolved that case through a consent decree.
- The consent decree required CSUB to bring the proportion of female varsity athletes within five percentage points of the proportion of female students.
- Facing budget constraints, CSUB adopted a campus-wide plan aimed at “substantial proportionality” between athletic participation and student-body gender composition.
- CSUB implemented squad-size targets that expanded women’s opportunities and limited the size of certain men’s teams.
- CSUB capped the men’s wrestling roster at 27 athletes for 1995–96 and 25 for 1996–97.
- Stephen Neal (wrestling coach and team captain) and other athletes and supporters sued, alleging the roster caps violated Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause.

## Issues

1. Whether Title IX prohibits a university from using gender-conscious measures, including reducing men’s roster spots, to address a disparity where men hold a disproportionately high share of athletic participation opportunities.
2. Whether the district court erred by rejecting the Department of Education’s Title IX athletics framework, including substantial proportionality as a permissible compliance method, when granting preliminary injunctive relief.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the preliminary injunction and remanded.
- Title IX does not bar remedial, gender-conscious actions to reduce men’s roster opportunities when necessary to address overrepresentation and to comply with Title IX and its athletics regulations.
- CSUB’s proportionality-based plan, including the wrestling roster cap, was not facially inconsistent with Title IX.
- The district court erred by failing to defer to the agency’s reasonable interpretation of Title IX and by treating proportionality-based regulations as violating the statute.
- The court did not decide the Equal Protection claim at the preliminary-injunction stage.

## Legal Principles

- Title IX’s athletics enforcement permits institutions to pursue substantial proportionality between varsity participation opportunities and student enrollment as one route to compliance.
- Universities may use gender-conscious roster management, including limiting men’s team sizes, as remedial measures to correct disparities in participation opportunities.
- Courts should give appropriate deference to the Department of Education’s reasonable interpretation of Title IX and its implementing regulations in athletics.
- Title IX does not require that participation allocations be determined solely by existing or measured interest levels; exclusive reliance on interest-based measures may perpetuate historical inequality.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that Title IX allows CSUB to cap a men’s team roster as part of a remedial effort to achieve substantial proportionality in athletic participation, reversed the preliminary injunction against the roster cap, and remanded for further proceedings.


Neal v. Bd. of Trs. of the Cal. State Univs., 198 F.3d 763 (9th Cir. 1999)