Former Coach Files New Lawsuit Against SJSU

EXCLUSIVE: A former volleyball assistant coach at San Jose State University has initiated a new legal action regarding her alleged treatment during the controversy involving transgender athlete Blaire Fleming and female teammate Brooke Slusser. Melissa Batie-Smoose initially filed a lawsuit last October, but it was dismissed in September.

She is not giving up, however, and has made further allegations regarding her treatment prior to her suspension and eventual termination.

In her latest complaint, Batie-Smoose claims that head volleyball coach Todd Kress ridiculed her for supporting Donald Trump in front of players, reacted negatively to her religious objections regarding a transgender athlete’s participation, and made her feel “physically unsafe” during certain encounters.

The complaint states that she had repeatedly informed Kress, “in substance,” that “God made man and woman,” explaining that her beliefs prevented her from treating a male athlete as female. According to her, Kress responded with hostility and dismissed her political views.

The document further alleges that Kress would publicly scold her during practices, referring to her as ‘Trump-loving’ and mocking her political beliefs.

Additionally, the lawsuit suggests that Kress was aware of her Republican background and used this information to damage her rapport with players, exclude her from meetings, and diminish her coaching responsibilities.

The relationship at the heart of the latest complaint predates the controversy. Batie-Smoose has stated she previously collaborated with Kress at Florida State in 2006 and at Fairfield University from 2019 to 2022. After Kress moved to San Jose State, she accepted the associate head coaching role and relocated her family from Connecticut to California in January 2023.

Batie-Smoose has also claimed that she was unaware Fleming was transgender until she joined the team in 2023.

In the following seasons, disagreements about Fleming’s participation intertwined with her ongoing relationship with Kress, as well as her duties on the court and her standing within the athletic department.

One alleged confrontation, recounted in the complaint, arose after a canceled recruiting visit due to a hurricane impacting a recruit’s flight. After returning from the airport to inform Kress, Batie-Smoose claims he ignored her twice. When she made a comment about his behavior, he allegedly followed her into her office and closed the door.

During this encounter, he reportedly “cornered, yelled at, and berated her,” even threatening to have her fired. Batie-Smoose felt physically unsafe during this interaction.

She says she reported this incident to the athletics human resources department and a program administrator, but claims the response was that Kress was her boss and she needed to comply with him. There were no consequences for Kress’s behavior, according to the complaint.

Furthermore, the lawsuit describes confrontations involving players. While names are not disclosed, it states that Kress yelled at one athlete to such an extent that she experienced panic attacks, and Batie-Smoose reported this mistreatment to an administrator. Allegedly, Kress faced no punishment.

Another incident involves Kress publicly reprimanding a player for being late to the locker room after a loss, which led both Batie-Smoose and the player to inform the administrator about the situation, again without any disciplinary actions taken against Kress.

The new filing also references a previous accusation against Kress, where a former Fairfield player had alleged an assault in a hotel room in 1998. Batie-Smoose claims that after the former player alerted SJSU about her safety concerns in October 2024, an official recognized the issue. She argues that the university’s response to this report further supports her claims of disparate treatment.

Batie-Smoose submitted a Title IX complaint on October 29, 2024, alleging unequal treatment and failures to address issues concerning the transgender athlete and female players on that year’s team. Shortly thereafter, the university placed her on paid administrative leave.

According to her latest lawsuit, on November 2 — just 90 minutes before a home match — a university administrator prevented her from entering the gym, demanded that she surrender her identification and keys, and ordered her to leave. She claims she was unable to retrieve her belongings from her office. The lawsuit includes her suspension letter as an attachment.

This letter referenced a complaint against Batie-Smoose dated October 24, prior to her own Title IX submission. The allegations included differential treatment due to a protected status, sharing confidential student information, drinking alcohol with athletes during travel, unprofessional conduct, inappropriate language, and neglecting coaching responsibilities.

The letter imposed various restrictions on her, including barring her from campus and prohibiting contact with student-athletes, with exceptions only for legal counsel and a union representative.

Batie-Smoose contends that the university misused these accusations and applied its rules inconsistently between her and Kress.

She denies having disclosed confidential student records and asserts that any information she shared was derived from public sources or her own observations. Batie-Smoose admits to having a drink in an airport lounge while in the presence of adult players but clarifies that she didn’t buy or encourage any drinking. Yet she claims another male coach was drinking without facing similar consequences.

She also disputes claims regarding inappropriate language directed at athletes or refusal to coach any players for whom she held responsibility.

On January 31, 2025, athletics director Jeff Konya informed her that her temporary coaching appointment would not be renewed, a decision communicated through a letter from President Cynthia Teniente-Matson.

Batie-Smoose’s recent lawsuit was filed on October 13 in the Northern District of California, naming California State University trustees and 11 university employees, including Kress, following a legal setback in September.

On September 4, Judge Noël Wise dismissed her previous amended complaint, which claimed discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and Title IX, stating that the allegations did not convincingly link her suspension or non-renewal to her sex or her protected advocacy. The ruling highlighted that the university acted after she disclosed student information to the media against confidentiality instructions.

Wise noted that the discipline was imposed for breaking a confidentiality law rather than for opposing sex-based discrimination, allowing her to amend the complaint within 21 days. Now, Batie-Smoose and her legal team have amplified their claims with a range of new allegations.

San Jose State University and California State University have not provided comments on Batie-Smoose’s latest legal action.

A spokesperson for SJSU noted that due to ongoing litigation, they are unable to respond, while a CSU representative stated that they only became aware of the lawsuit recently and are still reviewing the claims.

The new complaint comes at a time when SJSU and CSU are embroiled in multiple legal battles involving Batie-Smoose, former athletes, and the administration under President Donald Trump.

On January 28, 2026, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights issued a findings letter regarding SJSU’s volleyball program. The findings suggested that the university had violated Title IX in matters concerning athletic participation, sex-separated facilities, and the processing of discrimination complaints.

Regarding employment and scholarships, the letter raised compliance concerns and noted evidence of unequal treatment while recognizing gaps in documentation.

Notably, the letter addressed the university’s handling of the two coaches involved. It stated that investigations into Batie-Smoose and Kress had begun on November 12, 2024, and questioned why Batie-Smoose was suspended while Kress was not. Observations from the investigation indicated that Kress may have crossed legal lines in discussing a student during interviews.

It also mentioned concerns among officials that suspending Kress could attract negative media attention and disrupt team stability.

Batie-Smoose’s lawsuit points to these findings, suggesting that the university enforced its policies selectively.

CSU has countered this comparison, claiming that the two coaches were not in the same situation, that Batie-Smoose disclosed confidential information, and that an investigation found insufficient evidence of retaliation by Kress against Slusser. The system has also challenged the processes and conclusions of the federal investigation.

Additionally, CSU has initiated its own lawsuit against the Education Department, claiming the government is trying to penalize SJSU retroactively for following the law and existing NCAA rules during the relevant seasons.

The university system has rejected the federal government’s proposed resolution agreement, asserting that their actions to protect transgender students did not amount to unlawful sex discrimination. Federal officials have warned that failing to comply could jeopardize funding, though a court order established protections against funding disruptions linked to these findings.

Since the 2024 season, changes in the legal landscape have occurred. On February 6, 2025, the NCAA updated its guidelines, allowing only athletes assigned female at birth to compete on women’s teams, following an executive order from Trump the previous day. The new policy permits male-assigned athletes to practice with women’s teams under specific conditions.

On June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the new restrictions, asserting that Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause allow schools to designate female teams based on biological sex, but left open the question of whether transgender women could participate on those teams.

This distinction holds significance in the SJSU case, where the right to exclude and the legal requirement to do so are not equivalent issues.

In March, a federal judge dismissed the Mountain West defendants from the lawsuit involving Slusser, Batie-Smoose, and other volleyball players, ruling that the conference was not subject to Title IX and did not act as a state actor for constitutional claims. Several claims against university officials were dismissed, but the court postponed decisions on Title IX damage claims against the CSU trustees as it awaits the Supreme Court’s ruling.

For Batie-Smoose, the latest lawsuit aims for both compensation and the restoration of her professional reputation.

She seeks reinstatement to her former position or a similar role, back pay, other compensatory damages, punitive damages against liable individuals, legal fees, and a jury trial. She also requests the removal or correction of any detrimental personnel records, including the suspension letter and the nondiscrimination policy finding. Notably, the complaint does not stipulate a total damages amount.

Currently, Batie-Smoose has returned to coaching, having been appointed as head coach at Cisco College in April.

However, her new filing requests the court to revisit the circumstances surrounding her termination — the gym entrance where her role was interrupted, the personnel file that resulted, and the university’s decisions that she believes turned a sports dispute into her loss of employment.

CSU has contested the broader claims against SJSU and asserts through its ongoing litigation with the Department of Education that it adhered to the law, maintained student privacy, and conducted thorough investigations into complaints.

It also alleges that an investigation found Batie-Smoose discriminated against Fleming based on her sex and gender identity, a claim Batie-Smoose denies, insisting she never refused to coach any athlete.