Board of Trustees of the California State University v. United States Department of Education

Summary

On March 11, 2026, San Jose State University and the California State University system filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California challenging the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) findings that SJSU had violated Title IX. The lawsuit described the OCR’s actions as “lawless overreach” and sought to prevent the department from withholding federal funding, which covers about two-thirds of SJSU students and $175 million in research grants. SJSU argued that its actions were consistent with Ninth Circuit precedent and intercollegiate athletics rules at the time and that the university “cannot be punished for following binding federal court decisions.” The lawsuit emphasized that OCR’s demands would have required SJSU to publicly declare that “the sex of a human – male or female – is unchangeable,” issue formal apologies, revise past athletic results, and adopt policies inconsistent with NCAA rules. The filing noted that the federal agency had provided prior guidance under previous administrations supporting transgender participation in women’s sports, which SJSU had relied on.

Prior to the lawsuit, on January 28, 2026, OCR issued a press release stating that SJSU had violated Title IX by allowing a male to compete on the women’s indoor and beach volleyball teams from 2022-2024. OCR concluded that SJSU’s policies “deny women equal educational opportunities and benefits” and warned that federal funding could be withheld if the university failed to comply. OCR found that female athletes “shared women’s locker rooms and hotel rooms with the male student while being unaware that he is a member of the opposite sex” and that the male athlete provided an “unfair physical advantage over opposing teams,” leading several all-women’s teams to forfeit matches rather than compete. The department also cited failures to promptly investigate complaints and prevent retaliatory actions against female athletes.

On March 24, 2026, OCR issued a Letter of Impending Enforcement Action to SJSU, noting that the university had refused to sign the proposed Resolution Agreement or take other steps to ensure female student safety. OCR warned that SJSU had ten calendar days to comply or face enforcement action, including referral to the Department of Justice and possible termination of federal funding. Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey stated, “We have provided SJSU with multiple opportunities to resolve its Title IX violations with common sense actions…Yet, SJSU remains obstinate, choosing a radical ideology over safety, dignity, and fairness for its own students. With today’s action, the Department is putting the university on notice: comply with the law or risk losing its federal funding.”

SJSU publicly responded to the OCR findings and impending enforcement, stating that the resolution “threatened to impose policies that directly conflict with Ninth Circuit precedent and federal law” and reaffirming its commitment to supporting LGBTQ students. CSU Chancellor Joseph Castro said the lawsuit sought to “protect the university’s students and faculty from arbitrary and unlawful federal actions.” The lawsuit also stressed that SJSU had acted in good faith under federal guidance and NCAA policies at the time and that the OCR orders would have retroactively penalized the university for actions taken in compliance with binding law.

The legal dispute intersected with broader federal cases on transgender participation in women’s sports, including a pending Supreme Court case challenging Idaho’s law that restricts transgender women from competing on women’s teams. SJSU cited this case, stating that “the president does not have the authority to override judicial decisions interpreting the Constitution or federal statutes much less to go back in time and change the rules that applied before he took office.” The university emphasized that it complied with NCAA transgender player policies during the 2022-2024 period and that executive orders issued during the Trump administration “do not retroactively change the federal guidance it was operating under from 2022 to 2024.” SJSU also stressed the critical nature of federal funding, stating, “If SJSU does not agree to all those extortionate terms, it will lose federal funding that is essential to SJSU’s ability to operate,” and highlighted that the OCR actions affected both athletic and academic programs, including Title IV financial aid for more than 21,000 students.