Attorneys for the United States Department of Education (DOE) filed a Motion to Dismiss on Wednesday, May 29, to answer a lawsuit filed by the National Wrestling Coaches Association (NWCA) and other organizations concerning the enforcement of Title IX. The 45-page document was submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.     This was the long-awaited response to the suit, first filed by the NWCA in January. The Department of Education received three extensions on the answer to the complaint, which was first due in March.    In the Motion to Dismiss, the DOE states: "defendant United States Department of Education respectfully moves this Court for an order dismissing this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction."    In the preliminary statement of the motion, the DOE attorneys contend the following:    "For the reasons set out below, plaintiffs' claims must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. As a threshold matter, plaintiffs lack standing to maintain this action because the relief that plaintiffs seek (i.e., invalidation of the DOE's interpretation of Title IX), even if it were to be granted in all respects, cannot and will not redress the injuries about which plaintiffs complain. If, as plaintiffs claim, educational institutions have eliminated athletic teams for one sex (or alternatively reallocated resources from one sex to another) as part of an effort to comply with Title IX (and its accompanying regulations and guidance), only those institutions are in a position to reinstate the teams in question. It is speculative, at best, if not entirely improbable, that an order by this Court invalidating DOE's interpretation of Title IX would have any substantial impact on decisions by educational institutions to add or eliminate athletic teams. Even if the Court were to enter such an order, educational institutions receiving federal funds would remain subject to Title IX's prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex. Title IX's prohibition against intentional discrimination may be enforced not only by the federal government, but also through a private cause of action by an injured party against the recipient. Because the interpretation of Title IX challenged by plaintiffs in this case has been endorsed and adopted by seven federal circuit courts of appeals, a contrary decision by this Court would not necessarily affect the legal interpretation of Title IX applied by courts in private litigation. In these circumstances, plaintiffs cannot demonstrate any substantial likelihood that educational institutions would risk liability to private parties (e.g., female athletes) by adding or reinstating men's athletic teams and thereby increasing athletic opportunities for male athletes. Because the relief plaintiffs seek cannot redress the injuries about which they complain, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action."    In addition to challenging the jurisdiction of the NWCA and the other organizations to sue, the Department of Education also claims that the suit is not permissible due to "sovereign immunity." In the preliminary statement, the DOE attorneys assert:    "Plaintiffs' claims are also barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity both because they are outside the scope of the limited waiver of sovereign immunity contained in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and because they are time-barred. The APA, which provides the only avenue through which plaintiffs may sue the federal government in an action such as this, authorizes judicial review of final agency action only in circumstances where "there is no other adequate remedy in a court . . . ." 5 U.S.C. § 704. As stated above, Title IX's prohibition against intentional discrimination may be enforced through a private cause of action by the injured party against recipients of federal funds. Plaintiffs' remedy against the recipient institutions is not only "adequate" but superior to any remedy available in this action because, without joinder of the educational institutions involved (which are the only entities in a position to reinstate intercollegiate sports teams as plaintiffs seek), there is no means by which the courts can redress the injury about which plaintiffs complain. Because plaintiffs have an adequate remedy in a court against recipients of federal funds for any injury they may have suffered as a result of intentional discrimination by those recipients, the APA does not authorize judicial review."    The complete document filed by the Department of Education can be downloaded as a PDF file from the NWCA webpage (www.nwcaonline.com)    No official statement has yet been issued by the NWCA or the other organizations involved with the lawsuit concerning the response from the government.