Jen Harris's federal complaint against Rene et al. is 71 pages long. I've been through it a couple times; here is an initial breakdown.
THE FACTS
There is not much new in the factual narrative that hasn't been stated before either on OTL, in the papers, or in NCLR's previous press releases. NCLR has claimed that several other players will support its claims about discrimination, but the complaint does not include much additional information along those lines.
The complaint does, however, reference the experience of another "targeted" player. It alleges that during the '03-'04 year, Rene came to believe that this other player was gay. Rene allegedly attempted to ostracize that player as a "bad influence" and told Jen that the player was trying to "brainwash" her.
The player is unnamed in the complaint.
THE CAUSES OF ACTION
The complaint includes 20 causes of action against the various defendants. Many of them are overlapping. Here is a brief and nonexhaustive overview of the claims.
1. Gender discrimination in violation of state and federal constitutions, Title IX, and Pennsylvania antidiscrimination law.
These claims are, I think, the core of the case. Harris alleges that Portland pressured her to be feminine and non-gay. She says that Portland harassed and booted her because Harris "did not conform to the gender stereotype of femininity." Hopkins is the key case here.
2. Race discrimination in violation of state and federal constitutions, Title VI, and Pennsylvania antidiscrimination law.
Harris says that Portland carried out her discriminatory policies mostly against African American players. Harris also says that Portland pressured her not to wear her hair in cornrows, a style that "reflect[s]... African American identity."
3. Breach of contract.
This is an interesting claim. Harris alleges that her scholarship agreement incorporated PSU's antidiscrimination policy, and thus that by violating that policy, the defendants violated their contract with Harris.
She also alleges that Rene violated her own employment contract by violating the policy, and that Harris was an intended third-party beneficiary of that contract.
4. Procedural due process
Harris says that after she was kicked off, the defendants refused to afford her a hearing or any sort of appeal.
5. Substantive due process, right to reputation, other privacy torts
The substantive due process claim appears to be a sort of Lawrence claim. Harris says that she has a fundamental privacy interest in both her sexual orientation and her dress/appearance. She alleges that Rene violated that right.
She also alleges that Rene, by inquiring about private matters and publicizing false and harmful information about Harris (i.e., telling players that Harris was gay and a bad influence), violated state tort law and the state constitutional protection of the "right to reputation."
6. Defamation and retaliation.
When Harris initially went public with her claims, Rene responded with a press release saying that Harris was kicked off for nondiscriminatory reasons -- because she was a bad team player. Harris alleges that Rene's response was both defamatory and an act of retaliation in violation of Harris's First Amendment rights.
REMEDIES
Harris is seeking compensatory damages of at least $50,000 as well as unspecified punitive damages.
She is also seeking a variety of non-monetary remedies. She asks the court (1) to order the defendants not to discriminate against other players, (2) to require annual anti-discrimination training for Portland and other employees, (3) to require PSU to adopt a better grievance and appeal procedure and to notify students and staff about the procedure, and (4) to require PSU to hire a full-time employee to monitor the athletic department's compliance with the school's antidiscrimination policy.
THE FACTS
There is not much new in the factual narrative that hasn't been stated before either on OTL, in the papers, or in NCLR's previous press releases. NCLR has claimed that several other players will support its claims about discrimination, but the complaint does not include much additional information along those lines.
The complaint does, however, reference the experience of another "targeted" player. It alleges that during the '03-'04 year, Rene came to believe that this other player was gay. Rene allegedly attempted to ostracize that player as a "bad influence" and told Jen that the player was trying to "brainwash" her.
The player is unnamed in the complaint.
THE CAUSES OF ACTION
The complaint includes 20 causes of action against the various defendants. Many of them are overlapping. Here is a brief and nonexhaustive overview of the claims.
1. Gender discrimination in violation of state and federal constitutions, Title IX, and Pennsylvania antidiscrimination law.
These claims are, I think, the core of the case. Harris alleges that Portland pressured her to be feminine and non-gay. She says that Portland harassed and booted her because Harris "did not conform to the gender stereotype of femininity." Hopkins is the key case here.
2. Race discrimination in violation of state and federal constitutions, Title VI, and Pennsylvania antidiscrimination law.
Harris says that Portland carried out her discriminatory policies mostly against African American players. Harris also says that Portland pressured her not to wear her hair in cornrows, a style that "reflect[s]... African American identity."
3. Breach of contract.
This is an interesting claim. Harris alleges that her scholarship agreement incorporated PSU's antidiscrimination policy, and thus that by violating that policy, the defendants violated their contract with Harris.
She also alleges that Rene violated her own employment contract by violating the policy, and that Harris was an intended third-party beneficiary of that contract.
4. Procedural due process
Harris says that after she was kicked off, the defendants refused to afford her a hearing or any sort of appeal.
5. Substantive due process, right to reputation, other privacy torts
The substantive due process claim appears to be a sort of Lawrence claim. Harris says that she has a fundamental privacy interest in both her sexual orientation and her dress/appearance. She alleges that Rene violated that right.
She also alleges that Rene, by inquiring about private matters and publicizing false and harmful information about Harris (i.e., telling players that Harris was gay and a bad influence), violated state tort law and the state constitutional protection of the "right to reputation."
6. Defamation and retaliation.
When Harris initially went public with her claims, Rene responded with a press release saying that Harris was kicked off for nondiscriminatory reasons -- because she was a bad team player. Harris alleges that Rene's response was both defamatory and an act of retaliation in violation of Harris's First Amendment rights.
REMEDIES
Harris is seeking compensatory damages of at least $50,000 as well as unspecified punitive damages.
She is also seeking a variety of non-monetary remedies. She asks the court (1) to order the defendants not to discriminate against other players, (2) to require annual anti-discrimination training for Portland and other employees, (3) to require PSU to adopt a better grievance and appeal procedure and to notify students and staff about the procedure, and (4) to require PSU to hire a full-time employee to monitor the athletic department's compliance with the school's antidiscrimination policy.
posted by Ted at 1:38 PM
