In the case of Roderick Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jackson, a high school girls' basketball coach who alleged that he was fired for complaining about gender discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. The court held that retaliation against an individual because they complained about sex discrimination is another form of intentional sex discrimination encompassed by Title IX. This decision extended protection to whistleblowers who allege violations under this law and face retaliation as a result from their employers or institutions receiving federal funds.

In the dissenting opinion for Roderick Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, Justice Thomas argued that Title IX does not provide a private right to sue for retaliation claims. He contended that Congress did not intend to include such claims when it enacted Title IX and pointed out that no other federal courts had recognized this right before the Supreme Court's decision in this case. Furthermore, he asserted that allowing retaliation suits would significantly expand the scope of Title IX beyond its original intent, which was to prevent sex discrimination in education programs receiving federal funding. In his view, if Congress wanted to allow individuals to sue for retaliation under Title IX, it should have explicitly stated so in the statute.