The U.S. Supreme Court ruled March 29 that a high-school coach fired for complaining that his girls' basketball team wasn't treated equally to the boys' team can sue his employer for retaliation because he is protected by Title IX.

Roderick Jackson, a teacher at Ensley High School in the Birmingham, Alabama, public schools, sued the Birmingham Board of Education for noncompliance with Title IX. He claims his repeated complaints about the treatment of his team compared to the boys' team led not to improvements for the girls but to his dismissal as coach. He remained a teacher at the school, but he lost the extra pay that came with the coaching position.

He alleged, among other complaints, that the girls' team was not receiving equal funding or access to equipment and equal facilities. Jackson's complaints began in December 2000 but were not addressed by his supervisors. He was removed as girls' basketball coach in May 2001. He then sued the Birmingham Board of Education.

The lawsuit was dismissed by several lower courts that ruled whistleblowers were not protected by the anti-discrimination legislation, but the Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments in the case. Attorneys for both Jackson and the Birmingham Board appeared before the justices late last year.

In the 5-4 decision authored by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the court ruled that retaliating against a whistleblower that brought gender discrimination to light is, in itself, a form of discrimination, and that discrimination is addressed through Title IX.

"(Title IX) does not require that the victim of the retaliation must also be the victim of the discrimination that is the subject of the original complaint," O'Connor wrote. "Where the retaliation occurs because the complainant speaks out about sex discrimination, the 'on the basis of sex' requirement is satisfied. The complainant is himself a victim of discriminatory retaliation."

O'Connor further wrote that reporting incidents of Title IX violations is vital to enforcement of the anti-discrimination law. If retaliation against people who did report violations were not protected, she noted that whistleblowers would be less likely to come forward.

"Indeed, if retaliation were not prohibited, Title IX's enforcement scheme would unravel," she wrote.

Agreeing with O'Connor were Justice John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the dissenting opinion. He was joined in the minority by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy.

In his dissension, Thomas asserted that retaliation is not discrimination on the basis of sex because Jackson was not discriminated against on the basis of his own gender.

Because of the decision, Jackson can now sue the Birmingham Board of Education.

-- Michelle Brutlag Hosick