Skip to main content


In March 2017, in Doe v. Mercy Catholic Medical Center, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit established that medical residents, who function as both students and as employees of a hospital, could bring private causes of action for sex discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. This ruling revived a long-standing split amongst the Circuits, with the Third Circuit parting company from the Fifth and Seventh Circuits and aligning with the First and Fourth Circuits, which hold Title VII’s carefully crafted administrative remedial procedure does not pre-empt claims under Title IX. This Comment argues that the Third Circuit’s decision to allow medical residents to bring Title IX claims furthers the goals of the legislation, which seeks to combat discrimination against minorities in education and, more specifically, to advance the number of women in professional fields such as law and medicine. Since successfully completing a medical residency program is a pre-requisite to practicing as a physician, it is important that U.S. courts give medical residents full access to the panoply of remedies available and allow discretion in bringing either a Title VII or Title IX discrimination claim.


File nameDate UploadedVisibilityFile size
6 Sep 2022
428 kB



  • Subject
    • Civil Rights and Discrimination

    • Education Law

    • Gender

    • Labor and Employment Law

  • Journal title
    • Boston College Law Review

  • Volume
    • 59

  • Issue
    • 9

  • Pagination
    • E. Supp. 64

  • Date submitted

    6 September 2022