The rise of women's sports in recent years has been undeniable. We watched college basketball stars Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese catapult into the WNBA, witnessed Paige Bueckers ink two historic Name Image and Likeness deals, and saw Nebraska Women’s Volleyball draw a world record-breaking crowd of over 92,000 attendees. It’s clear that women’s sports is finally having its moment in the United States. In addition to their growing popularity, women's sports are attracting increasing investment and proving their power to generate revenue, defying past limitations and societal biases. Jessica Berman, National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) Commissioner, was declared Sports Illustrated’s 2024 Innovator of the Year, leading the average NWSL team valuation to increase by 57% to $104 million, with the expansion of a new team in Denver to kick off in 2026. The market is there.
However, for women’s sports to continue their rise, young athletes need to be fostered and supported as they grow. That’s why advocates say President Donald Trump and his administration could halt not only recent progress made in the industry, but decades' worth. Trump has discussed eliminating the Department of Education (DOE), a decision with wide-ranging implications. Part of that department’s oversight includes enforcing Title IX — the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex in any federally funded education program or activity. Passed in 1972, Title IX “leveled the playing field” for women at school, allowing them entry into educational programs they were historically denied from, protecting sexual assault survivors from intimidation at school, and ensuring that equal opportunity is given to girls’ athletics. In the absence of the DOE’s enforcement, Kenyora Johnson, CEO of End Rape on Campus, says women and girls may see more barriers to equal educational opportunities, including in athletics.
“We're going to see the reverse of decades of progress that has been made, including the reduction of funding, resources, and I would even say access to specific programming, especially for women identified athletes, even though we are seeing an increase in viewership amongst women's sports in the most recent couple of years,” Johnson says. “ I feel like we're going to see a lot more discrimination be perpetuated in that sense.”
If Trump were to eliminate the DOE (which would require congressional approval), that doesn’t mean Title IX will be eliminated, it just means who is in charge of enforcing it would change. “Hypothetically, if it were to be eliminated, it would strain another agency, which would require new oversight and compliance processes to be established, along with ensuring that the department's functions are still being administered,” Johnson says. “Getting rid of a department won't change the law. It simply would change who is administering the law.”
Jon Fansmith, vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, told the Hechinger Report that the Department of Justice would likely take over enforcement if the DOE were eliminated. That raises concern that the DOJ may not prioritize enforcement because of its many other responsibilities, the outlet reports. Of course, even in the event that Title IX were transferred over to the DOJ, and if the DOJ doesn’t focus on its enforcement, that doesn’t mean girls’s sports programs will abruptly end. It simply means that schools may not longer be forced to comply with equal opportunity in athletics — many may choose to anyway. According to Candi Smiley, deputy Title IX director at UCLA, eliminating the DOE will make women athletes more vulnerable. “Trump wants to defund the Department of Education,” says Smiley. “If he's able to do that, that means less protection for women in sports.”
One of the ways that vulnerability may manifest is in who gets access to opportunities that pave the way for a college education.
“I really think that’s the scariest part. You’re going to eliminate kids attending college,” says Brandon Leopolus, award-winning sports lawyer and professor at Loyola Law School. Without strong sports programs, many girls and women who count on athletic scholarships may lose out on the opportunity to attend college. Johnson points out that the majority of those missing out on that opportunity will be Black and brown girls.
“When we think about who makes up the sports world, we’re talking about a majority of Black and brown bodies. We’re talking about women and girls. Sometimes, if not for the most part, we’re talking about a lot of athletes coming from low socioeconomic backgrounds,” says Johnson. “You’re giving students an opportunity to see things from different vantage points that are not always in a textbook.”
Of course, some students are already seeing this chilling effect. On day one of his administration, Trump declared that the federal government will only recognize the male and female genders, and will “establish male and female as biological reality and protect women from radical gender ideology.” While the Biden administration proposed a rule that would have stopped states from banning transgender athletes from sports that align with their gender identity, the rule was never finalized, according to the Hechinger Report. Many expect the Trump administration will abandon this effort, paving the way for states to legally exclude trans athletes from playing sports. Already, Trump signed an executive order saying that transgender people aren’t included in federal sex discrimination protections, and before he even took office, the House of Representatives voted to ban trans players from girls’s sports.
Beyond the classroom, Olympic sports in particular rely on educational institutions like college programs to develop athletes for international competition. The United States, unlike most leading nations, does not federally subsidize Olympic sports but leans on private donors and their college athletic departments. Despite the increased interest in women’s sports, many sports programs operate at a significant financial loss. Without the strict enforcement of Title IX by the Department of Education, sports like swimming, track and field, and rowing — where the U.S. has traditionally excelled on the Olympic stage — are at risk of budget cuts or elimination of their school’s program, according to Leopolus. “That dominance that America has in a lot of women’s sports at the international stage, that’s going to go away fast,” says Leopolus. “It means that our programs at the Olympic level will not just have fewer kids participating. It also means we’re not going to win as many medals.”
One of the many factors contributing to the rise in popularity of women’s sports is college athletes' recent ability to monetize their success. The introduction of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals, which grant students the right to control and profit from their personal brand, benefitted college athletes as a whole, but women were particularly successful. As of now, colleges do not pay NIL money (third-party “boosters” of the universities compensate the athletes), therefore, the market does not need to comply with Title IX. However, as we complete year four of these nuanced changes, there is another major factor schools and college student-athletes are facing at the intersection of Title IX and NIL: the NCAA antitrust settlement. As a result of three major class action lawsuits against the NCAA, certain student athletes are owed approximately $2.78 billion in back damages to be paid over 10 years. Schools will also now be compelled to share up to $20 million in revenue with student athletes.
The DOE says this payment is subject to Title IX, meaning it must be of equal opportunity to athletes regardless of sex. But if the DOE is abolished, it’s not clear how that money will be equitably distributed. And, in the absence of Title IX, schools may eliminate programs to reallocate funding for antitrust violations, and there’s no guarantee that it won’t unfairly impact female athletes. “The antitrust cases are going to have the biggest impact on us, and nobody is seeing it,” says UCLA’s Smiley. “Before, you had to make sure that it was a numbers game and that it fit within the Department of Education, but now, [if eliminated] you might just look at the numbers.”
Threats to dismantle the Department of Education and, with it, Title IX enforcement are not new. They happened under President Reagan, and they're happening again today. However, as Johnson reminds us, “People have the power to hold the government accountable.” Not only do women and girls participating in youth and college sports mean having access to educational opportunities, but it is also the foundation to continue advancing the professional and Olympic presence we’ve worked generations to build for this country and globally. “Title IX is more than an equality thing,” says Leopolus. “It benefits everybody.”
