In Austin v. University of Oregon, the Ninth Circuit recently dismissed a complaint brought by three male student-athletes, alleging that the University of Oregon discriminated against them on the basis of their sex in violation of Title IX and violated their due process rights in connection with the University's sexual misconduct proceedings.
The court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) (not the evidentiary presumption set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green), provided the appropriate standard for reviewing, at the pleading stage, a motion to dismiss in a Title IX case. In this case, the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient, non-conclusory allegations plausibly linking the disciplinary action to discrimination on the basis of sex. The court also held that the plaintiffs' due process claims failed because they received constitutional due process through the University's disciplinary proceedings.
.png)
