HUNTINGTON – Members of Marshall University’s swimming and diving team have filed a federal lawsuit alleging the elimination of the team is discriminatory and violates Title IX.
The 15 female athletes filed their potential class-action lawsuit March 9 in Huntington against the university and its Board of Governors. The 33-page complaint alleges the decision to end the team discriminates against female Marshall student-athletes and potential student-athletes on the basis of their sex and deprives them of equal opportunities to participate.
A statement from Marshall University President Brad D. Smith and Athletics Director Gerard Harrison said it wouldn’t comment on specifics of pending litigation.
“We respect the right of individuals to pursue legal action, and we are reviewing the filing,” the statement said. “Marshall’s decision to discontinue the program remains in place. …
“Marshall conducted a months-long review of athletics program costs and sustainability. That review showed that swimming and diving was not sustainable at the level required to support Division I competition over time, particularly when considered alongside other institutional needs and obligations.”
On February 12, Marshall informed the athletes the team was being eliminated.
“Although blindsided, the Marshall swimmers and divers competed at the 2026 American Athletic Conference Women’s Swimming and Diving Championship the following week, bringing home school records — a 1st place in 200 Meter Butterfly, a 2nd place in the 100 Meter Freestyle, a 3rd place in the 200 Meter Individual Medley, a 4th place in the 50 Meter Freestyle, and many other impressive personal and team achievements,” the complaint states.
“Marshall’s intent to eliminate the women’s swimming and diving team is entirely consistent with its history of sex discrimination in its intercollegiate athletic program.”
The athletes say the elimination of the team caused them harm and constitutes “intentional, prohibited discrimination based on sex” in violation of Title IX, which requires educational institutions receiving federal funds to provide equal opportunities to participate, equal athletic financial aid and equal treatment in athletics without regard to sex.
The plaintiffs claim Marshall receives substantial federal funding but “fails to provide the required equality to females in its intercollegiate athletic program.”
“Specifically, the athletes say Marshall fails to satisfy any of the following measures of compliance with Title IX’s mandate to provide equal opportunities to participate to its female student-athletes:
X It fails to provide female student-athletes with athletic opportunities at a rate that is “substantially proportionate” to their undergraduate full-time enrollment rate;
X It fails to demonstrate a “history and continuing practice of program expansion responsive to the interests and abilities of the sex that has been historically underrepresented” (i.e., females); and
X It fails to show that the interests and abilities of the historically underrepresented sex have been fully and effectively accommodated.
The plaintiffs say Marshall’s plan to eliminate the women’s swimming and diving team continues and exacerbates its failure to satisfy these requirements and violates Title IX.
The complaint says Helen Grant Consulting perform an independent Title IX evaluation last fall that concluded “Marshall is out of compliance with Title IX’s athletics participation requirements.”
“The report confirms that Marshall does not have a history and continuing practice of expanding women’s participation opportunities,” the complaint states. “And the fact that Marshall now seeks to eliminate a fully rostered and highly competitive women’s swimming and diving team means it does not fully and effectively accommodate women’s interests and abilities either.”
To comply with Title IX, the report says Marshall must show substantial proportionality, meaning the percentage of women in the athletics program closely approximates the percentage of women in Marshall’s undergraduate student body.
But it says Marshall cannot satisfy this standard. An investigation showed Marshall would need to add about 210 more opportunities for female student-athletes to do so, according to the complaint.
“Indeed, it does not come close,” the complaint states. “And the planned elimination only makes matters worse.”
Marshall plans to add a women’s STUNT team, which can support up to 65 student-athletes.
“Plaintiffs seek to end the historic and ongoing discrimination against female student-athletes at Marshall, create lasting gender equity in Marshall’s intercollegiate athletic program and ensure Marshall’s future compliance with Title IX,” the complaint states.
The plaintiffs seek immediate injunctive relief requiring Marshall to forego its plan to eliminate any women’s sport, including the women’s swimming and diving team. The transfer portal fully opens March 11, and the complaint says some members of the team will have to decide whether to stay at Marshall for their studies or go to another swimming and diving program.
“Losing these members of the team will devastate the swimming and diving program at Marshall,” the complaint states. “There is no adequate remedy at law for this harm. If the court were to act quickly, the athletes on the women’s swimming and diving team could stay with the Marshall program.
“Similarly, the coaches and staff would be able to work with the athletes during this academic year and prepare for the 2026-27 season, including by recruiting, budgeting, scheduling competition for the season, and ensuring proper facilities are available. …
“Preliminarily enjoining Defendants’ elimination of women’s sports, including the varsity women’s swimming and diving team, would merely ensure continuation of the status quo during this litigation.”
The complaint also suggests Marshall could allocate budget and athletic opportunities “more equitably merely by shifting Marshall’s longstanding favoritism toward men to a more equal allocation between men and women.”
The plaintiffs are being represented by Nicholas S. Johnson, Cary Joshi, Josh I. Hammack, Savanna Jones and E. Gabrielle Marcum of Bailey & Glasser.
The named plaintiffs are Allison Dodd, Madelyn Akin, Lauren Bell, Madison Bowen, Katherine Fisher, Ella Houk, Parker Lynch, Lauren McNamara, Nina Nugent, Lauren Ramsey, Sadie Rogers, Charlotte Thompson, Molly Warner, Karley Wolfgram and Zoe Wuerdeman. The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Robert C. “Chuck” Chambers.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia case number 3:26-cv-00183
