Press Cites Clarkson’s Arthur Bryant on Title IX, NIL, and College Sports Law Developments
Clarkson’s Arthur Bryant continues to be a prominent voice in the battle for gender equity and Title IX compliance in intercollegiate athletics. With decades of experience representing women athletes and championing equal rights in college sports, Bryant is arguably America’s most accomplished Title IX lawyer. He has been cited by the press nationwide for his views on recent developments, including NIL (name, image, and likeness) payments, the proposed House v. NCAA settlement, Clarkson’s Title IX lawsuit against the University of Oregon, and the Trump administration’s decision to rescind a Title IX fact sheet issued in January by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights under President Biden.
Despite the changes in administration, Bryant emphasized that Title IX “remains a clear and unwavering mandate requiring equal opportunities for male and female athletes in terms of participation, athletic financial aid, and treatment.”
“Title IX is crystal clear in barring all gender discrimination. That principle has not changed,” Bryant told the ABA Journal. “The law is still the law,” he said to Eddie Pells of the Associated Press. “Title IX requires schools that receive federal funds to treat women and men in their intercollegiate athletic programs equally.”
Bryant highlighted to ESPN that Title IX has always applied to all areas of college athletics, including revenue-producing sports. “When Title IX was first proposed, and repeatedly after that, opponents of it, or strong supporters of men’s sport including the NCAA, tried to get revenue-producing sports exempt from it,” he said. “Congress repeatedly rejected those efforts because it wanted Title IX to be what it is: a federal statute prohibiting sex discrimination in all aspects of educational institutions, including their athletic programs. Schools could not discriminate against women to make money, to avoid losing money or because some donors liked men and men’s sports more than women and women’s sports.”
Beyond the NIL controversy, Bryant’s advocacy extends to objecting with MoloLamken LLP to the proposed House v. NCAA antitrust settlement. Their filing includes objections from 152 college athletes and urges Judge Claudia Wilken to reject the proposed settlement because it violates Title IX and antitrust laws, eliminates roster spots for tens of thousands of college athletes, and was reached through an illegal and unconstitutional process in which women and athletes subject to roster limits were not adequately represented.
Additionally, Bryant leads Clarkson’s lawsuit on behalf of 32 female athletes charging the University of Oregon with depriving them of hundreds of thousands of dollars annually in equal athletic financial aid annually, equal opportunities to participate, and equal treatment and benefits, including NIL support and payments.