Pro Bono Litigation Against Sonoma State University Academic and Athletic Cuts

CASE BACKGROUND 

Sonoma State University (SSU) is a public university established in 1960 as part of the California State University (CSU) system. It operates under the authority of the State of California and the CSU’s Board of Trustees. It currently serves over 5,000 students. SSU’s athletics program has been a significant part of the institution since its early years. It competes at the NCAA Division II level and is a member of the California Collegiate Athletic Association. There are approximately 243 student-athletes competing in intercollegiate athletics at Sonoma State.

On January 22, 2025, Interim SSU President Emily Cutrer emailed a letter to all students, faculty, coaches, and staff. It stated that the school was eliminating 22 academic degree programs—including philosophy, economics, women’s and gender studies, art history, physics, and others—and closing six entire departments. It required many students to simply “change majors.” And it announced a large number of faculty in those programs would be let go. Notably, however, there were few cuts to the administration.

Cutrer also eliminated all NCAA Division II athletics at SSU, claiming $3.7 million in savings without substantiating that figure. Preliminary expert analysis indicates that athletics is a net financial benefit to SSU and that eliminating the program will actually harm SSU's finances. It appears that the CSU's calculation of the $3.7 million in savings was fundamentally flawed in that it failed to account for all of the revenues generated from student athlete enrollment.

Further, there is evidence suggesting that SSU knew that it would be eliminating athletics and numerous degree programs well in advance of the January 22 decision, but kept it hidden from the public and prospective students, and kept recruiting student athletes to transfer and enroll into Sonoma State even while the Interim President knew that athletics would be eliminated. Student athletes came to Sonoma State based on promises that Sonoma State made to them in recruitment, only to learn two days into the spring 2025 semester that all athletics had been cut. The vast majority of student athletes were forced to transfer to other schools, exacerbating Sonoma State's enrollment declines. The students impacted by the decision face irreparable harm to their academic and athletic careers.

Because the discontinuation of academic degree programs is evidently damaging to students’ lives, the CSU Board of Trustees has adopted standing regulations that ensure procedural protections and transparency in such decisions. These include:

• extensive review by the academic senate, including fact gathering and weighing specified factors, and preparing a recommendation on which a decision can be made
• consultation with enrolled students
• specific mechanics for enrolled students to still take discontinued courses through graduation (a “teach-out plan”)

The CSU failed to follow these mandatory procedural requirements.

CASE FILED

On March 7, 2025, Saveri Law Firm and Gross Klein PC filed a complaint on behalf of student athletes whose academic and athletic careers were gravely impacted by the CSU's decision. The suit was filed in Sonoma County Superior Court against defendants Cutrer, Chancellor Mildred Garcia, SSU, and the CSU Board of Trustees. It seeks a ruling that the CSU's decision is unlawful and void, and seeks an injunction requiring the CSU to follow its own mandatory requirements before cutting the programs.

“The decision did not follow any of the required procedural protections before callously imploding student’s academic and athletic lives, so it must be set aside,” Saveri Law Firm partner David Seidel said. “The lack of transparency and willingness to keep the cuts hidden until after the spring semester began shows a complete disregard for the wellbeing of the students. We are proud to represent these talented and dedicated student athletes who are now forced to stand up to the failures of Sonoma State’s leaders on behalf of themselves and the entire student body.”

“Interim President Cutrer’s and Chancellor Garcia’s decision ignored the catastrophic impacts to the plaintiffs, coaches, faculty and so many others in the Sonoma State community,” said Ross Middlemiss, attorney with Gross Klein PC. “The decision, and the manner in which it was made, is contrary to the mission of the California State University, and is a dereliction of duty on the part of the Interim President and Chancellor. We look forward to proving the illegality of this unconscionable decision in court, so the impacted students can continue their exemplary representation of Sonoma State University, both in the classroom and in their athletic arenas.”

On April 15, 2025, the Court granted a temporary restraining order against the CSU, barring it from taking further action to implement or effectuate cuts to SSU academic programs and departments. The Court found that defendants had likely violated SSU's policies as to the academic discontinuations, and violated students' due process rights. However, on May 9, 2025, the Court denied plaintiffs' petition for a writ of mandate and preliminary injunction against defendants, holding that a single email sent from the academic senate explaining how the regulations were not followed constituted a post-hoc substantial compliance with the policies. Based on its finding that the single email constituted substantial compliance, the Court held there was no point in issuing the writ, and denied it on the merits.

On June 9, 2025, plaintiffs appealed. After briefing and oral argument, however, on March 20, 2026, the California Court of Appeal dismissed plaintiffs' appeal on jurisdictional grounds, holding that plaintiffs' appeal was premature, and that students must await a final judgment on the entire case to appeal the Court's denial of the writ. On April 29, 2026, plaintiffs petitioned the California Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeal's dismissal. On June 17, 2026, the California Supreme Court granted review.

CONTACT US 

If you wish to inform us of any unfair business practice, antitrust or competition issue, or comment on one of our cases, please use the form below. There is no cost or obligation for our review of your case. We agree to protect your name and all confidential information you submit against disclosure, publication, or unauthorized use to the full extent under the law. Please note that completion of this form does not contractually obligate our firm to represent you. We can only represent you if both you and our firm agree, in writing, that we will serve as your attorney. Please read our disclaimer.