ILNews

10 schools to schedule girls’ basketball on Friday, Saturday nights

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By the 2016-2017 school year, boys’ and girls’ varsity basketball games at one high school will be equally scheduled on Friday and Saturday nights, according to a consent decree entered Monday in federal court. The agreement comes after a lawsuit challenged that girls’ games are typically scheduled on school nights or other non-preferred times.

Amber Parker, the former varsity girls’ basketball coach at Franklin County High School, sued school corporations located in western and southwestern Indiana and the Indiana High School Athletic Association claiming the practice of holding boys’ games primarily on weekends and girls’ games primarily on weeknights was discriminatory. Parker’s daughter played on the Franklin team.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in February vacated summary judgment  in favor of the defendants on the Title IX and equal protection claims and remanded for further proceedings. The federal court found the girls’ schedule was not discriminatory.

The agreement filed Monday settles Parker’s suit. It lays out how the defendant schools will gradually increase the number of Franklin County girls’ varsity games played in “prime time” – Friday and Saturday – until parity is reached in the 2016-2017 school year. The agreement includes a “safe harbor” for defendants of not more than a two-game differential during prime time.

It also lays out when Saturday afternoon games may be scheduled.

The decree remains in effect through the 2016-2017 school year, unless the plaintiffs agree to dissolve it sooner based on reporting and record-keeping goals.

The decree doesn’t constitute an admission by the defendants or any related entity that they engaged in any unlawful acts as outlined by the lawsuit, the decree says.

“Further, Defendants vigorously contest liability and are entering into this Decree solely for the purpose of avoiding additional costs of litigation,” it reads.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT