U.S. Department of Education Finds University’s Transgender Student-Athlete Policies Violated Title IX

Quick Hits

• The Department of Education found that San José State University’s policies allowing student-athletes assigned male at birth to compete in women’s sports and access the corresponding facilities “deny women equal educational opportunities and benefits.”
• This finding follows a directed investigation pursuant to President Donald Trump’s February 2025 executive order barring transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports.
• The executive order—which takes the position that allowing transgender student-athletes’ participation in women’s sports undermines fairness and opportunities for women and girls—threatens federal funding for, and Title IX enforcement actions against, educational programs that do not comply with the policy established in the order.

On January 28, 2026, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced its finding that San José State University’s (SJSU) policies allowing student-athletes assigned male at birth to compete in women’s sports and access the corresponding facilities violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.

The finding follows OCR’s directed Title IX investigation into SJSU, announced in February 2025, pursuant to President Trump’s Executive Order (EO) 14201, titled, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.” The EO states that allowing transgender athletes to compete in women’s sports “is demeaning, unfair, and dangerous to women and girls, and denies women and girls the equal opportunity to participate and excel in competitive sports.”

OCR found that SJSU had recruited and allowed a transgender student-athlete to compete on SJSU’s women’s indoor and beach volleyball teams. In its findings, OCR cited privacy concerns, safety concerns, and concerns related to an unfair physical advantage over opposing teams as a result of SJSU’s decision.

OCR also concluded that SJSU had violated Title IX by not promptly and equitably investigating Title IX complaints filed by other SJSU student-athletes related to the transgender student-athlete and by taking actions that discouraged other student-athletes from participating in the Title IX process.

OCR issued a proposed Resolution Agreement to SJSU to voluntarily resolve the Title IX noncompliance violations. The proposed Resolution Agreement requires SJSU to take the following actions:

• “Issue a public statement to the SJSU community that SJSU will adopt biology-based definitions of the words ‘male’ and ‘female’ and acknowledge that the sex of a human—male or female—is unchangeable”;
• “Specify that SJSU will follow Title IX by separating sports and intimate facilities based on biological sex”;
• “State that SJSU will not delegate its obligation to comply with Title IX to any external association or entity and will not contract with any entity that discriminates on the basis of sex”;
• “Restore to individual female athletes all individual athletic records and titles misappropriated by male athletes competing in women’s categories, and issue a personalized letter of apology on behalf of SJSU to each female athlete for allowing her participation in athletics to be marred by sex discrimination”; and
• “Send a personalized apology to every woman who played on SJSU’s women’s indoor volleyball (2022–2024), and 2023 beach volleyball, and to any woman on a team that forfeited rather than compete against SJSU while a male student was on the roster—expressing sincere regret for placing female athletes in that position.”

Key Takeaways

OCR’s noncompliance finding and proposed Resolution Agreement will have significant implications for educational institutions receiving federal financial assistance, particularly in states with conflicting laws. Though the finding does not indicate a withholding of federal funding, educational institutions should note that such withholding is a remedy within OCR’s purview and that the Trump administration will likely continue to focus on transgender student-athletes’ participation in interscholastic athletics.

The SJSU decision is likely not the end of the road. OCR has also launched investigations into other educational institutions based on alleged Title IX violations related to transgender student-athletes, the results of which have not yet been finalized. Additionally, whether the Supreme Court of the United States follows in OCR’s footsteps will be seen when it rules on two cases expected to be decided in June 2026. On January 13, 2026, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., cases involving transgender student-athletes challenging state laws restricting participation in girls’ and women’s sports to athletes assigned female at birth.

Ogletree Deakins’ Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Practice Group, the Higher Education Practice Group, and the Sports and Entertainment Industry Group will continue to monitor developments and will provide updates on the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Compliance, Higher Education, and Sports and Entertainment blogs as additional information becomes available.

Follow and Subscribe
LinkedIn | Instagram | Webinars | Podcasts