“Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears” is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trump’s judges on Americans’ rights and liberties. It includes judges nominated in both his first and second terms.
Judge Kevin Newsom, nominated by Donald Trump to the federal court of appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, wrote a 2-1 decision joined by Trump Judge Andrew Brasher that affirmed the dismissal of Title IX claims brought by students against a college volleyball coach. Judge Adalberto Jordan partly dissented in the April 2025 case of Demarcus v University of South Alabama.
What happened in this case?
Several students at the University of South Alabama contended that their volleyball coach, Alexis Meeks-Rydell, was mistreating them “physically, verbally, psychologically and sexually.” For example, they maintained that the coach “pinched their buttocks, required them to participate in ‘floor hugs’ (which involved Meeks-Rydell lying on top of a player), and forced them to tell her that they loved her”, and also “swore at and made abusive comments to them” and “instituted corporal punishments.”
The coach resigned after several years and, among other actions, the students sued the University under Title IX for sex discrimination. A district court dismissed the complaint as a matter of law, claiming primarily that the students had failed to notify an “appropriate person” under Title IX. The case was appealed to the Eleventh Circuit.
How did Newsom and Brasher rule and why is the result harmful?
The 2-1 majority opinion by Newsom and Brasher affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the students’ case. They discussed each student and the notification that was provided and agreed that none of the students had properly notified any official who could have taken appropriate action.
Judge Adalberto Jordan, who was nominated by President Obama, strongly dissented as to one student, Caitlin Tipping. He explained that she had plausibly alleged notice of the coach’s improper behavior to the Associate Athletic Director Chris Moore. He wrote that after Tipping was effectively forced to leave the university due to the sexual harassment and abusive misconduct, the coach and Moore schedule a meeting with Tipping where they intimidated her, including by falsely claiming that she would be subject to a $6000 fine for leaving early unless she agreed to write a letter asserting she was leaving for reasons unrelated to the coach’s conduct. Jordan concluded that Tipping’s Title IX claim should have gone forward.
As a result of the ruling by Trump judges Newsom and Brasher, however, Caitlin Tipping lost her opportunity to seek justice for the harassment she suffered. The decision also sets a troubling precedent concerning proof of Title IX claims, particularly in the Eleventh Circuit, which includes Alabama, Florida and Georgia. The case also illustrates the importance of our federal courts to health, welfare and justice and the significance of having fair-minded judges on the federal bench.