Here’s what happened.
A former college volleyball coach who says she was mocked for supporting President Donald Trump is fighting back in federal court, bringing renewed attention to allegations of political discrimination, religious hostility, and the treatment of conservative employees at American universities.
Melissa Batie-Smoose, formerly an associate head coach of the San Jose State University women’s volleyball team, has filed an amended federal lawsuit accusing university officials of retaliation after she raised concerns about transgender participation in women’s sports.
The lawsuit also alleges that head volleyball coach Todd Kress repeatedly ridiculed her political beliefs, including calling her a “Trump lover” in front of student-athletes.
Now, nearly two years after her departure from the university’s volleyball program, Batie-Smoose is pursuing another opportunity to have her allegations heard in court.
Her legal battle comes as President Trump’s administration continues challenging San Jose State over its handling of women’s athletics.
College Coach Claims She Was Targeted for Supporting Trump
According to the lawsuit filed October 13, 2026, Batie-Smoose alleges that her support for President Trump became a source of workplace hostility.
She claims Kress repeatedly criticized her political preferences and made comments intended to embarrass her in front of the volleyball team.
The former coach alleges that Kress called her a “Trump lover” and mocked her Republican affiliation during team practices.
Batie-Smoose maintains that the comments damaged her credibility with players and contributed to an increasingly hostile professional environment.
The complaint also alleges that she was excluded from certain meetings, stripped of coaching responsibilities, and treated differently from other staff members.
She further describes an August 2023 confrontation in which Kress allegedly followed her into an office, closed the door, and berated her.
Batie-Smoose claims the encounter left her feeling physically unsafe.
According to the lawsuit, she reported the incident to university officials but believes her concerns were not adequately addressed.
These allegations have not been established in court, and the university disputes the broader claims of improper treatment.
Nevertheless, the controversy raises significant questions about political expression and workplace fairness at publicly funded universities.
Religious Beliefs Spark Additional Controversy
The lawsuit goes beyond political disagreements.
Batie-Smoose also alleges that her religious convictions contributed to tensions within the San Jose State volleyball program.
The disagreement centered partly on transgender athlete Blaire Fleming’s participation on the university’s women’s volleyball team.
Batie-Smoose maintains that her Christian beliefs shaped her position on biological sex and athletic eligibility.
According to the complaint, she expressed concerns about allowing transgender women to participate in female athletic competitions.
She alleges that Kress responded negatively to her position and treated her objections with hostility.
The controversy grew during the 2024 volleyball season, when several opposing teams forfeited matches against San Jose State amid disputes over transgender participation.
The situation drew national attention and became part of a larger debate surrounding fairness in women’s sports, Title IX protections, and religious freedom.
For those who favor sex-based eligibility requirements, the dispute highlights concerns about preserving athletic opportunities for female competitors.
Those supporting transgender inclusion argue that athletes should be treated fairly under applicable participation rules and anti-discrimination protections.
The disagreement continues to influence legal battles involving college sports across the country.
University Suspends Coach Following Formal Complaint
One of the most significant developments occurred in October 2024.
On October 29, Batie-Smoose submitted a Title IX complaint raising concerns about the treatment of female athletes and the university’s handling of its volleyball program.
Just days later, on November 2, university officials placed her on paid administrative leave.
According to her lawsuit, she was prevented from entering the volleyball facility shortly before a scheduled home match.
She alleges that university officials demanded her identification and keys and instructed her to leave the premises.
Batie-Smoose argues that the decision was retaliatory.
However, university records present a competing explanation.
A complaint against Batie-Smoose had reportedly been made on October 24, before she submitted her own Title IX complaint.
Allegations against her included improper disclosure of confidential student information, unprofessional conduct, and other workplace concerns.
Batie-Smoose disputes the university’s characterization of her conduct and argues that its rules were applied unfairly.
San Jose State ultimately declined to renew her coaching appointment in January 2025.
The disagreement over why she was suspended and lost her position remains central to her legal challenge.
Trump Administration Delivers Major Setback to San Jose State
The controversy took another significant turn after President Trump returned to the White House.
On January 28, 2026, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights concluded that San Jose State had violated Title IX in connection with its treatment of athletes and the handling of complaints involving the women’s volleyball program.
Federal investigators raised concerns about sex-based athletic participation, access to facilities, and the university’s response to discrimination complaints.
The findings also questioned differences in how university officials handled personnel matters involving Batie-Smoose and Kress.
Those conclusions provided additional support for critics who had questioned the university’s conduct.
However, the federal findings did not amount to a court judgment in Batie-Smoose’s employment lawsuit.
San Jose State and the California State University system rejected the administration’s conclusions.
In March 2026, university officials filed their own lawsuit challenging the Department of Education’s determination.
They argued that the university had followed applicable laws and athletic eligibility policies.
The separate legal fight could determine how federal officials enforce Title IX requirements and how universities respond to future disputes involving women’s athletics.
Judge Gives Former Coach Another Opportunity
Batie-Smoose’s legal battle has not been without setbacks.
On September 4, 2026, U.S. District Judge Noël Wise dismissed her earlier amended employment complaint.
The judge found that the allegations presented at that stage were insufficient to support her discrimination and retaliation claims.
The ruling also addressed concerns about the disclosure of confidential student information.
However, the court allowed Batie-Smoose to submit a revised complaint.
That opportunity became important when she returned to federal court on October 13 with additional allegations involving political hostility, religious beliefs, and alleged workplace retaliation.
Her latest filing names the California State University Board of Trustees and several university officials, including Kress.
Batie-Smoose is seeking financial compensation and other legal remedies related to her departure.
She is also requesting reinstatement or comparable employment relief, along with corrections to disputed personnel records.
The lawsuit gives her another chance to challenge the university’s actions, although the ultimate outcome remains uncertain.
No court has determined that the defendants unlawfully retaliated against her because of her political affiliation or religious beliefs.
Political Discrimination on College Campuses Faces Renewed Scrutiny
Beyond the legal details, the lawsuit highlights a broader debate about political tolerance at American universities.
Public colleges and universities frequently emphasize diversity, inclusion, and respect for differing viewpoints.
Yet disputes involving employees with conservative political or traditional religious beliefs have raised questions about how consistently those principles are applied.
Batie-Smoose’s allegations bring those concerns directly into the world of collegiate athletics.
Her complaint raises an important issue: Can university employees express support for a political candidate or religious position without those beliefs affecting their professional treatment?
Political differences alone do not automatically establish unlawful discrimination.
Courts must consider the specific conduct alleged, the legal protections involved, and the evidence supporting each claim.
Still, the case could generate greater attention to the rights of public university employees and the importance of maintaining workplaces where differing opinions can be expressed professionally.
Women’s Sports Remain a Major National Issue
The San Jose State controversy is also unfolding during a period of intense national debate over the future of women’s athletics.
President Trump has made restrictions on transgender participation in women’s sports a prominent part of his administration’s policy agenda.
Supporters of those restrictions argue that biological differences can affect athletic competition and that eligibility standards should protect opportunities for female athletes.
Opponents raise concerns about excluding transgender competitors and emphasize the importance of equal treatment.
Universities, athletic associations, and government agencies continue to face competing legal and policy demands.
The San Jose State dispute illustrates just how complicated those disagreements can become when questions about employment, student privacy, religious beliefs, and athletic eligibility overlap.
Federal courts may ultimately play an important role in determining how some of these competing obligations should be interpreted.
What Happens Next for the Former Coach?
Batie-Smoose has continued her coaching career since leaving San Jose State, accepting a head coaching position at Cisco College in Texas.
But her new federal lawsuit demonstrates that the disagreement over her previous employment remains unresolved.
The university and its officials will have opportunities to respond to the latest allegations through the legal process.
Meanwhile, San Jose State’s separate legal battle with the Trump administration continues.
Both disputes could have consequences beyond the university’s volleyball program.
They involve questions about workplace protections, religious expression, political disagreement, and the federal government’s role in regulating women’s college athletics.
For Batie-Smoose, the latest filing represents a renewed opportunity to make her case.
Whether that effort leads to compensation, reinstatement, or another legal setback will depend on the evidence and future court decisions.
As the legal proceedings move forward, one question remains at the center of the controversy: Should political beliefs and religious convictions ever become a factor in determining someone’s professional future at a public university?
Leave a Reply