Kelley v. University of Illinois
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
35 F.3d 265 (1994)
In 1993, the University of Illinois (defendant) was faced with a $600,000 budgetary deficit in its athletic programs and decided to cut four varsity teams: men’s and women’s diving, men’s fencing, and men’s swimming. The University acknowledged that it did not also cut the women’s swimming program because it feared possible Title IX liability. The selection criteria for the cut programs included factors such as team costs, competitive success, and spectator interest in the sports. Kelley (plaintiff) and other members of the University men’s swimming team filed suit claiming reverse discrimination in violation of Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The district court held for the University, and Kelley appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Cummings, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 723,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 723,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.