Title IX After the House v. NCAA Settlement: Understanding the Growing Liability Exposure

As courts and the NCAA continue to dismantle longstanding restrictions on athlete compensation, colleges and universities are assuming expanded authority over how athletics benefits and resources are distributed. This increases institutions’ Title IX exposure related to allocation decisions.  

The approved settlement in House v. NCAA, which significantly expands the types of financial benefits student-athletes may receive and permits new compensation and revenue-sharing models, marks a pivotal shift in institutional responsibility. As colleges and universities gain more ability to compensate athletes, potential liability for ensuring those decisions comply with Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination also grows. 

As a result, the House settlement is not only a governance challenge; it introduces new and evolving Title IX liability risks that are likely to shape future litigation, regulatory enforcement, and reputational risk. 

Title IX Liability Is Actively Evolving 

Title IX litigation in this area remains active and unsettled, and institutions should expect continued legal development rather than immediate clarity. Courts have not yet resolved how Title IX will apply to all aspects of post-House compensation frameworks, including new revenue-sharing models and institutionally provided benefits. Following approval of the House settlement, several groups of female athletes appealed the federal court’s decision in the 9th circuit arguing that the settlement’s back-pay damages allocation violates Title IX. As a result of these challenges, the distribution of back pay under the settlement is paused.  

Additionally, in 2025, the Trump administration rescinded prior federal guidance stating that name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation for athletes must comply with Title IX gender-equity rules, stating that Title IX does not govern how revenue from college athletics is distributed among athletes. Then, on March 6, 2026, the White House announced that a new executive order addressing college athletics would be coming soon; the announcement was not clear if that new order would address Title IX.   

How the courts will weigh executive actions in their interpretation of Title IX’s application to a post-House environment remains to be seen.  

Risk Management Action Steps 

To manage evolving Title IX liability risks while navigating post-House athletics reforms, consider the following governance- and process-focused actions, which are likely to be central to litigation scrutiny: 

• Engage legal counsel and senior leadership early when evaluating new athletics compensation or benefits models. As compensation structures, revenue streams, College Sports Commission (CSC) requirements, and NCAA policies evolve under the settlement framework, prior equity analyses may quickly become outdated. Early review before implementation can help identify potential disparate impacts, align decisions with institutional risk tolerance, and reduce the likelihood of corrective action after the fact. 
• Clarify governance structures and decision-making authority related to athletics benefits and resources. In any Title IX challenge, an institution’s decision-making framework will be closely examined. Clear documentation should show who makes athletics compensation decisions, how those decisions are made, and when equity is considered. That record can help your institution show it took compliance seriously. Undocumented rationales or ad-hoc practices may increase exposure if decisions are later challenged. 
• Coordinate athletics, Title IX, legal, finance, and compliance functions. Post-House compensation decisions increasingly sit at the intersection of multiple institutional roles. Cross-functional coordination helps ensure consistency in how decisions are evaluated, documented, and implemented, reducing the risk that Title IX implications are overlooked or addressed inconsistently. 
• Document equity analyses, decision rationales, and oversight processes. Maintaining written records of equity reviews, financial modeling, and the rationale for compensation decisions can help your institution respond effectively to audits, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) inquiries, or litigation. Also document the processes used to oversee and periodically review athletics compensation decisions for Title IX equity, including how potential concerns are evaluated and addressed over time. These oversight practices complement the governance and decision-making structures described above by ensuring that compensation decisions continue to be monitored for equity after they are implemented. 
• Periodically reassess Title IX impacts as compensation structures evolve. Because compensation and revenue-sharing models are likely to change over time, do not treat Title IX compliance as a one-time exercise. Establish regular review cycles to assess whether evolving practices remain aligned with Title IX requirements and institutional equity commitments. 
• Monitor pending litigation, regulatory guidance, and NCAA policy developments. Ongoing litigation and regulatory activity will continue to shape how Title IX applies in the post-House environment. Institutions that actively track these developments will be better positioned to anticipate risk, adjust policies proactively, and demonstrate responsiveness to emerging legal standards. 

More From UE 

Name, Image, Likeness; Rules Changes; and Unionization: Higher Ed Athletics 

Understanding the Changing Landscape of College Athletics and NIL