Page:Veronica Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High School District (September 19, 2014) US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.djvu/7

 A

In July 2008, Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment on their Title IX claim alleging unequal participation opportunities in athletic programs. Sweetwater conceded that “female athletic participation” at Castle Park was “lower than overall female enrollment,” but argued that the figures were “substantially proportionate” for Title IX compliance purposes, and promised to “continue to strive to lower the percentage.” As evidence, Sweetwater noted that there are “more athletic sports teams for girls (23) than &hellip; for boys (21)” at Castle Park.

The district court gave summary judgment to Plaintiffs on their unequal participation claim in March 2009. ''See Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High Sch. Dist.'', 604 F. Supp. 2d 1264 (S.D. Cal. 2009). The court found that “substantial proportionality requires a close relationship between athletic participation and enrollment,” and concluded that Sweetwater had not shown such a “close relationship” because it “fail[ed] to provide female students with opportunities to participate in athletics in substantially proportionate numbers as males.” Id. at 1272. Rejecting one of Sweetwater’s arguments, the district court reasoned that it is the “actual number and the percentage of females participating in athletics,” not “the number of teams offered to girls,” that is “the ultimate issue” when evaluating participation opportunities. Id. After finding that Plaintiffs had met their burden on each prong of the relevant Title IX compliance test, the district court determined that Sweetwater “failed to fully and effectively accommodate female athletes and potential female athletes” at Castle Park, and that it was “not in compliance with Title IX based on unequal participation opportunities in [the] athletic program.” Id. at 1275; ''see Neal v. Bd. of Trs. of Cal.''