43
Ma’lik Richmond returns to federal court this afternoon
By Justin Wier
YOUNGSTOWN
After a ruling by a federal judge, Ma’lik Richmond played his first downs as a Youngstown State University football player on Sept. 16. A hearing in federal court this afternoon will determine whether he can continue to play.
On Sept. 16, Judge Benita Y. Pearson granted Richmond a temporary restraining order ruling that YSU could not prevent him from playing in football games unless the action resulted from a legitimate coaching decision.
YSU appealed the decision, but the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal because YSU did not demonstrate that it would be irreparably harmed if Richmond were to play.
Coach Bo Pelini put Richmond in the game late in the third quarter. All members of YSU’s roster played in the 59-9 win over Central Connecticut State University.
Today’s hearing could extend the temporary restraining order in the form of an injunction. The judge could also deny the injunction, which would allow YSU to prevent Richmond from playing.
Richmond’s next opportunity to compete would be Saturday against South Dakota State University at Stambaugh Stadium.
YSU had previously issued a statement that said Richmond would be allowed to remain on the team but not participate in athletic competition after a petition circulated asking for his removal.
Richmond was one of two Steubenville High School football players convicted of rape by a juvenile court judge in a highly-publicized 2012 case.
Richmond’s lawyers argue that he was denied the right to play football this season despite not having violated the student code of conduct — a breach of contract — and without due process in violation of the 14th Amendment.
While YSU disputed whether students enter into a contract with the university, Judge Pearson said this was Richmond’s strongest claim.
Richmond’s lawyers also claim the university discriminated against Richmond on the basis of his sex, in violation of Title IX — a federal law which requires universities to provide the same opportunities to both male and female students.
A complaint filed by Richmond’s attorneys on Sept. 13 claimed YSU had been “infected by an anti-male bias that has swept across America’s universities and colleges” which led the university to defer to “female-led advocacy” demanding Richmond be punished for actions that occurred prior to his time at YSU.
YSU’s attorneys contended that Richmond failed to show that a female student in the same circumstances would have received different treatment.
The parties plan to present evidence in defense of their claims at 2 p.m. this afternoon at the Thomas D. Lambros Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse.