All Scores

Explaining the USWNT Gender Discrimination Lawsuit

BRAD SMITH/ISI PHOTOS

With sports still on hiatus, the biggest upcoming showdown is between the U.S. women’s national team and their own federation.

On June 16th, the USWNT’s gender discrimination lawsuit will finally head to trial in what promises to be one of the defining moments in women’s sports history (yes, it’s that big of a deal). But while the lawsuit has been making headlines for over a year, there remains a surprising amount of confusion regarding exactly what’s being alleged, what’s being sought, and how U.S. Soccer intends to defend itself. There’s no easy way to summarize the case, so we won’t bother trying. Instead, we’ve prepared a comprehensive guide outlining what’s at stake and why the outcome is anything but obvious.

It should be noted that the trial was originally scheduled to begin on May 5th, but was pushed back due to the coronavirus pandemic. This delayed start theoretically gives both sides more time to reach a pre-trial agreement, especially given U.S. Soccer’s recent change in leadership. Then again, there was also tremendous pressure on U.S. Soccer to settle following last summer’s World Cup, and yet, nothing happened. Even if the two sides do choose to enter mediation once more, the arguments laid out below still provide the terms of the debate they’ll be having behind closed doors, rather than in front of a jury.

First, some background:

No matter one’s rooting interest in the upcoming trial, it should be clear that U.S. Soccer’s impact on women’s soccer has been undoubtedly net positive. Though it may not have much competition in this regard, there’s no question that within the global context, the federation has been the strongest institutional advocate for the sport for several decades running. Its long-term investment in the women’s national team is a big reason why the USWNT remains the most accomplished squad in the world.

In one of the federation’s legal filings, they even quote an earlier Megan Rapinoe praising the federation’s support for both women’s soccer in general and the national team specifically. (Indeed, rumor has it that there are still high-ranking U.S. Soccer executives who are privately furious that anyone would suggest the federation has hurt rather than helped the growth of women’s soccer.)

But even throughout their decades of successful partnership, tensions have always lingered between the team and the federation. Players have long complained that their support from U.S. Soccer, while superior to their opponents’ around the world, was and continues to be inferior to the treatment provided to their male counterparts at home. And while such complaints have often been kept beneath the surface, they’ve occasionally burst out into public view. Two such notable occasions involve the legendary 1999ers and an earlier version of this current USWNT.

In 2000, just months removed from their historic World Cup victory in Pasadena, the 1999 national team boycotted a tournament in Australia over inadequate pay. And in 2016, Megan Rapinoe, Alex Morgan, Carli Lloyd, Becky Sauerbrunn, and Hope Solo filed a pay discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, again alleging pay disparity. In three years, this complaint went nowhere, leading the players to change course and file their current lawsuit in Los Angeles federal court.

img
DAVID MADISON/GETTY IMAGES
The facts of the case:
  • The lawsuit was filed under the Equal Pay Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act on March 8th, 2019, International Women’s Day.

  • The USWNT are alleging that they have been subjected to “institutionalized gender discrimination,” and are therefore entitled to damages. In essence, they are asking for an increase in salary and significant back pay.

  • The lawsuit was granted class action status in November, meaning any woman who suited up for the USWNT going back to February 2015 is entitled to seek injunctive relief and back pay damages.

  • Carli Lloyd, Alex Morgan, Megan Rapinoe and Becky Sauerbrunn are the class representatives. (Hope Solo filed her own gender discrimination lawsuit against U.S. Soccer last August, after she was terminated by the federation.)

  • Trial is set to begin June 16th, pending any last minute settlement between the two sides and/or further COVID-19 delays.

What the USWNT is alleging: 

The USWNT is trying to prove that, as employees of U.S. Soccer, they have been subject to institutionalized gender discrimination. In layman’s terms, they’re arguing that they’ve done the same work as the men’s team, but have been paid less because of their gender. That’s illegal, in case you were wondering, and now the national team is asking the law (i.e., the court) to step in and force U.S. Soccer to write them a check.

While the heart of the case is pay disparity, it’s important to note that the USWNT has to do much more than just prove they’ve been paid less than the men. U.S. Soccer could readily concede this point and still win the case if they can successfully argue that either such inequity is the result of anything but misogyny, or that the two national teams perform fundamentally different jobs.

This second line of reasoning was famously and disastrously pursued in a recent legal filing that claimed that the USWNT had less responsibility and skill than their male counterparts — hence, they supposedly do a different job. The blatant misogyny and disrespect of such comments sparked immediate outcry, and eventually led to the resignation of then-U.S. Soccer president Carlos Cordeiro.

The big thing to take away from all this is that the USWNT has a higher burden of proof, as they have to prove they do the same job as the men, are still paid less, and it’s because of their gender. U.S. Soccer, on the other hand, only needs to refute one of these claims, by proving either the two teams don’t do the same job, the women aren’t always paid less, or that when they are, it’s not because of their gender.

img
BRAD SMITH/ISI PHOTOS
What the USWNT wants:

In short: better pay and restitution (i.e. back pay). The first of these two demands has received the majority of media coverage, in large part because the outcome is easy to measure: either U.S. Soccer pays its national teams more or less the same, or it doesn’t.

Back pay is a trickier calculation, but an expert witness called in by the USWNT put the initial estimate at $67 million. Such a figure was reached by calculating what the women would have earned for their past performances if they were operating under the same compensation structure as the men. Naturally, U.S. Soccer had some problems with the math, most notably the fact that it included World Cup bonuses, which are set and paid for by FIFA.

And this $67 million is only the beginning: the players are also seeking damages including attorney fees as well as punitive damages to deter future discrimination. This aspect of the case has been wildly under-discussed (fans at the World Cup, after all, were chanting “equal pay,” not “back pay”). Raising the USWNT’s wages is one thing. Forking over an additional $67 million+ is another thing entirely, and if you’ve heard U.S. Soccer complain that this lawsuit could bankrupt them, this is what they’re referring to. They have enough money to pay the women’s team more. They likely don’t have enough to pay them back without making serious cuts to their operations, especially their youth development efforts.

What the USWNT will argue: 

They make less money for doing the same job as the men:

  • Given their respective pay structures (more on this in a second), if both the women’s and men’s teams won 20 games in a row, a USWNT player would earn $28,333 less, or about 89% of what her male counterpart would make.

  • Prior to 2017, when the USWNT negotiated a new CBA, these numbers were even more skewed: a top player on the women’s team would have earned $99,000 for those 20 wins, or 38% of the $263,320 of a men’s team player. (Remember, this lawsuit includes players who suited up for the USWNT going back to 2015).

  • Then there’s the question of World Cup payouts: in 2014, the men’s team was paid $5.375 million in World Cup bonuses for being eliminated in the round of 16, while the women were paid $1.725 million for winning the whole thing in 2015 (more on this later).

In addition to unequal pay, the team is also subject to unequal support:

  • From 2014-2017, the women played 21% of their domestic games on artificial turf versus 2% for the men.

  • And in 2017, the USSF chartered at least 17 flights for the men’s team. For the women’s? Zero.

img
BRAD SMITH/ISI PHOTOS

Lastly, in recent years, the women’s team has (probably) brought in more revenue to U.S. Soccer than the men’s. According to the Wall Street Journal, between 2016 and 2018, the women’s games earned $50.8 million in ticket sales revenue while the men brought in $49.9 million.

Ticket revenue only accounts for a quarter of U.S. Soccer’s total operating revenue. The rest comes from sponsorships and broadcasting rights, which U.S. Soccer sells as a bundled package for both teams, making it impossible to know how much each contributes. Still, it’s not hard to imagine that the USWNT is pitching in more than their fair share. The final from last summer’s World Cup was the most watched soccer game in the U.S. since the 2015 WWC final. And during the 2019 tournament, according to Nike, the USWNT home jersey became the number one single-season jersey ever sold on Nike.com. These disparate facts alone can’t definitively prove that the USWNT is bringing in more revenue than the men’s team, but then again, neither can they prove the men are doing better.

Anyone who tries to dismiss the USWNT’s case by blindly citing “the numbers” hasn’t done their homework. To be blunt, the job of a national team is to make money for their federation. And though we’re missing some important numbers, the ones we do have suggest that the women’s team is, at worst, bringing in revenues similar to the men’s.

What makes this complicated: 

Technically speaking, equal pay between the national teams isn’t currently possible given the differences between each team’s collective bargaining agreements. This is a key point of U.S. Soccer’s defense, as they have continually made the claim that rather than institutionalized misogyny, it’s primarily structural differences between the two CBAs that account for the unequal pay.

Soccer players’ pay is fairly complicated, but the basic breakdown between the two CBAs is as follows: the women have a guaranteed base salary and are eligible for performance based bonuses (i.e. suiting up and winning games), whereas the men have no base salary and only receive performance bonuses for playing and winning games. The women’s agreement also includes medical and dental insurance, paid child-care assistance, paid pregnancy and parental leave, and severance benefits — benefits that U.S. Soccer says are not provided to the men’s national team. (As you can imagine, there’s disagreement between the sides as to how much these benefits should factor in.)

This is where things get tricky: the reason the men can afford a riskier, but potentially higher-paying contract (i.e. one without guarantees, and only bonuses) is because their MLS clubs already give them a significant salary, which also includes all the benefits that U.S. Soccer provides the women’s team. And while they won’t publicly state this for fear of tarnishing the NWSL, it’s fairly obvious that the USWNT felt pressured to negotiate a “safer” CBA (with guaranteed salary + benefits) because their NWSL clubs couldn’t promise them the financial security they needed.

But it gets even more complicated: U.S. Soccer pays the NWSL salaries of USWNT members, and is (for at least another year) essentially managing the league. This fact could be used against U.S. Soccer: if they invested more in the NWSL, the USWNT could afford a stronger starting position when negotiating their national team contracts. But this same fact could also be used in U.S. Soccer’s defense, as it makes it harder to accuse the federation of gender discrimination when they’re paying double salary for each of their national team players.

img
JOHN TODD/ISI PHOTOS
Does U.S. Soccer have a case? 

There are multiple reasons to think U.S. Soccer could walk away from this case with their bank accounts intact. For starters, they’ve made significant efforts in recent years to address many of the issues raised by the national team. The USWNT hasn’t played a match on artificial turf since 2017, and U.S. Soccer has also begun to charter flights between games. Other inequities, ranging from hotel accommodations to meal money, have also been rectified. Such gestures aren’t world-changing, but they could make it difficult for the national team to prove that their federation is actively discriminating against them because of their gender.

But the biggest reason U.S. Soccer might walk away winners? They’re not the only party at fault.

For example, consider the differences in World Cup payouts. Clearly, everyone needs to do more to close the pay gap between the two tournaments: that includes sponsors, broadcast partners, FIFA, various national federations around the world, and yes, U.S. Soccer. But the simple fact is that at this moment, FIFA unilaterally controls the prize money, and given that the men’s tournament generates close to $6 billion in revenue versus $130 million for the women’s, it’s no surprise that FIFA chooses to pay out significantly higher bonuses to the men’s teams. That won’t change until every stakeholder ups their investment in the women’s tournament, and while U.S. Soccer is certainly one such stakeholder, it’s going to be hard to find them solely responsible for the current discrepancy in prize money. (On a positive note, FIFA is apparently planning to double the prize money for the 2023 Women’s World Cup.)
Every piece on the gameboard is interconnected. If the NWSL had more investors and were a more financially stable league, the USWNT could negotiate for riskier contracts back-loaded with performance bonuses.

The fact is that this case only has one defendant in court, but the criticisms being made reach far and wide. The USWNT is demanding that women’s soccer be given its due respect. And while U.S. Soccer has a role to play in both growing the World Cup and stabilizing the NWSL, the question now is whether the federation will be found liable for failing to live up to its duties, or if it will be spared as simply one of many institutions that needs to improve.

But let’s be honest, the USWNT may have already won

There’s a sense in which this case has already been decided. While you shouldn’t trust media narratives to accurately predict the fate of any case in court, they’re a pretty decent barometer of what the public is thinking. And right now, just about everyone is on the side of the USWNT, especially after the fiasco leading up to Cordeiro’s resignation.

And though the court of public opinion can’t force U.S. Soccer to write a check to its national team, it can continue to put pressure on the federation to step up their efforts, no matter what a jury in Los Angeles decides. Regardless of the case’s outcome, fans and commentators will be pressing U.S. Soccer to up their support for the USWNT, especially if, as seems likely, they continue to achieve at a significantly higher level than the men’s team.

img
JOHN TODD/ISI PHOTOS

In suing their own employer, the USWNT players have also become the de-facto face of a broader fight for gender equality both in sports and the American workplace. In recent years, athletes in other sports, including WNBA players and the U.S. women’s hockey team, have reached out to the USWNT, asking for advice regarding their own respective battles for improved equity and playing standards. And while the gender pay gap won’t be closed overnight, either in sports or the economy more broadly, the USWNT have done us all a favor by dragging the fight out into the light. Their willingness to openly and boldly assert their value and air their criticisms has opened the conversation to more urgent and pointed rhetoric. They’ve cleared the airways of vague, inoffensive chatter by clearly stating their opinions and demands. And in doing so, they’ve radically enlarged our collective understanding of what athletes can do when they apply their ambition and celebrity to a greater social cause.

The case is too complicated to call ahead of time, and yet it already feels historic. The USWNT are more than just a soccer team, and what’s being debated is far more than any specific dollar amount. This case has become a referendum on women’s sports, and both the players and U.S. Soccer know it. For any other team, that could be too much to bear. For the USWNT, this is exactly what they signed up for.

Indiana Fever Shoots for Redemption Against Seattle Storm

Indiana Fever guard Caitlin Clark waits for an inbound pass during a 2025 WNBA game.
The Fever are looking to end a two-game losing streak. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

The WNBA is back in action on Tuesday night, as the Indiana Fever and Seattle Storm headline a series of games that could make or break the current trajectories of several 2025 title contenders.

Seeking an especially strong Tuesday performance is the Fever, as Indiana tries to snap a two-game losing streak against the increasingly confident Storm.

"There are going to be stretches that are really good and there's going to be stretches that aren't as good," Fever guard Caitlin Clark said on Sunday, addressing her recent shooting slump.

While the Indiana and Seattle clash will lead the Tuesday charge, the night will also see young squads sizing up WNBA juggernauts as bottom-table teams look for a leg up:

  • No. 8 Indiana Fever vs. No. 5 Seattle Storm, 10 PM ET (NBA TV): The Fever need a win against a Storm side that can't seem to lose, as both teams eye the postseason.
  • No. 1 Minnesota Lynx vs. No. 9 Washington Mystics, 8 PM ET (WNBA League Pass): The up-and-coming Mystics will attempt to hand the Lynx a second season loss, as Minnesota star Napheesa Collier remains day-to-day with lower back stiffness.
  • No. 4 Atlanta Dream vs. No. 12 Dallas Wings, 8 PM ET (WNBA League Pass): The Dream are on a tear, surging up the standings as the struggling Wings attempt to take flight.
  • No. 10 LA Sparks vs. No. 11 Chicago Sky, 8 PM ET (NBA TV): The Sparks have cooled after a hot start while the Sky has yet to rev up, with both teams aiming to end a three-game losing streak on Tuesday night.

Teams across the league are hoping to make the most of every minute while also managing injury concerns and absences as the WNBA All-Star break looms.

WNBA Rookie of the Year Odds Shift as 2025 Draft Picks Heat Up

Washington Mystics rookie Sonia Citron guards Dallas Wings rookie Paige Bueckers during a 2025 WNBA game.
Washington rookie Sonia Citron and first-year Dallas star Paige Bueckers are both off to hot starts in their WNBA careers. (Stephen Goslings/NBAE via Getty Images)

The WNBA Class of 2025 is already making its mark on the league, with first-year players stepping up and showing out while the Rookie of the Year race — and betting odds — heat up.

No. 1 draft pick Paige Bueckers has been just as good as advertised, with the Dallas Wings guard leading her class in both minutes played and points per game while also charting league-wide in assists per game, steals per game, and mid-range shots made.

DraftKings currently has Bueckers as the clear WNBA Rookie of the Year race frontrunner at -1,000, though the dynamic DC duo of guard Sonia Citron (+1,500) and forward Kiki Iriafen (+1,000) are quickly gaining traction.

Iriafen won May's WNBA Rookie of the Month award after a series of career-opening double-doubles, while her Washington Mystics teammate Citron has continued to execute in the clutch — most recently posting a career-high double-double performance of 27 points and 11 rebounds in last Sunday's 91-88 overtime win over Dallas.

"Not only is [Iriafen] holding her own, she's excelling," Citron told JWS earlier this month. "And seeing that is just incredible."

"Soni just does all the little things," Iriafen added. "She doesn't shortcut anything, she's doing the fundamentals, she doesn't cheat the game at all."

International Signings Ramp Up as Soccer Teams Break for Women’s Euro 2025

San Diego Wave forward María Sánchez dribbles the ball during a 2025 NWSL match.
San Diego forward María Sánchez is transferring to Liga MX side UANL Tigres. (John Matthew Harrison/ISI Photos/Getty Images)

Though the NWSL hit the pause button this week, players worldwide are still on the move, as both European and US soccer teams use the midseason break to sharpen their lineups with international signings.

The NWSL has already seen one major departure, with the San Diego Wave announcing Monday that forward María Sánchez will return to her former Liga MX club UANL Tigres after nearly five years in the NWSL, with the Wave set to receive an undisclosed transfer fee in return.

"When the opportunity came to return to Tigres, I had to do a lot of inner searching, and I ultimately decided that returning to Liga MX Femenil and Tigres specifically was the best course of action for my career," the 29-year-old dual citizen and Mexico international player said in the Wave's release.

NWSL clubs are also setting their sights on European free agents, with the Washington Spirit bringing in Juventus forward Sofia Cantore last week — the first Italian signing in league history.

Also hopping aboard the player transaction carousel is new WSL side London City, with the top-flight debutantes inking OL Lyonnes midfielder and Dutch international Daniëlle van de Donk on Friday.

Meanwhile, van de Donk's wife and club teammate Ellie Carpenter is also potentially WSL-bound, with the defender reportedly nearing a deal that would see the Australian join Chelsea FC in return for the Blues sending Canadian international Ashley Lawrence to OL Lyonnes.

For their part, OL Lyonnes picked up defender Ingrid Engen from Barcelona as a free agent last week, adding the Norwegian international after snagging French forward and PSG's all-time leading scorer Marie-Antoinette Katoto earlier this month.

With the most recent NWSL CBA abolishing traditional trade windows, expect even more international signings and roster reshufflings before the league resumes play on August 1st.

San Diego Wave Honors Alex Morgan with Jersey Retirement

San Diego Wave players applaud Alex Morgan as she exits the pitch during her final NWSL game in 2024.
Morgan won the NWSL Shield with San Diego in 2023. (Meg Oliphant/Getty Images)

San Diego is paying tribute to one of their own, with the Wave announcing plans to retire the No. 13 jersey of NWSL and USWNT legend Alex Morgan on September 7th.

Still topping the team's all-time scoring leaderboard with 23 goals in just over two seasons with San Diego, the retired club captain will be the first-ever Wave player to receive the prestigious honor.

Morgan also led San Diego to the 2023 NWSL Shield as well as postseason appearances in the 2022 expansion club's first two seasons.

"Alex's legacy goes far beyond goals and accolades. She helped lay the foundation for this club and elevated the standard for what women's soccer is today," said Wave FC governor Lauren Leichtman in the team's Tuesday announcement.

"She made this city her home, inspired our fans and community, and helped define who we are," Leichtman continued. "Her impact will be felt for generations, and it's only fitting that her number becomes a permanent part of Wave FC history." 

Morgan joined the Southern California squad's ownership group just last month, saying "San Diego is where I've built my home, where I am raising my children, and found a purpose beyond my playing career."

How to attend the San Diego jersey retirement of Alex Morgan

San Diego will officially retire Morgan's No. 13 jersey during their home match against the Houston Dash at 8 PM ET on September 7th.

Tickets to the game will go on sale to the general public online at 6 PM ET on Tuesday.

Start your morning off right with Just Women’s Sports’ free, 5x-a-week newsletter.