The Gender Discrimination Lawsuit Two years later, seeing little progress on the complaint filed with the EEOC despite years having passed, 28 members of the WNT led a gender discrimination lawsuit against the USSF in California district court. The lawsuit was led on March 8, 2019three months before the start of the Women's World Cup in France. In the court filing, the WNT players cited \"institutionalized gender discrimination\" that hurt their pay as well as their working conditions.84 Many of the issues outlined in the lawsuit were similar to those in the EEOC complaint from 2016. For instance, the lawsuit noted that a "20-game winning top tier WNT player would earn only 38% of the compensation of a similarly situated [U.S. Men's National Soccer Team (MNT)] player\" and that \"[t]he pay for advancement through the rounds of the World Cup was so skewed that, in 2014, the USSF provided the MNT with performance bonuses totaling $5,375,000 for losing in the Round of 16, while, in 2015, the USSF provided the WNT with only $1,725,000 for winning the entire tournament. The WNI' earned more than three times less than the MNT whe performing demonstrably better. \"35 The lawsuit also noted that while the men only played one out of 49 domestic matches on artificial turf, the women's team, over the same time period, played 13 of their 62 domestic matches on articial turf;35 that while the USSF chartered at least 17 ights for the men, they chartered no ights for the women in 2017;37 and that the USSF \"manufactured revenue depression for the WNT\" by spending less on promotion for the WNT relative to the MNT and by charging lower ticket prices for WNT games relative to MNT games.88 The lawsuit even highlighted new grievances related to the 2017 CBA. For instance, the lawsuit alleged that a USSF representative said that \"market realities are such that the women do not deserve to be paid equally to the men,\"39 while claiming that the USSF rejected a \"revenue-sharing model that would test the USS '5 \"market realities' theory.\"90 While the WNT Players Association issued a statement saying it was not a party to the lawsuit, it still \"support[ed] the plaintiffs' goal of eliminating gender-based discrimination by USSR\"?1 In the statement, the Players Association described the lawsuit as \"an effort by the plaintiffs to address those serious issues through the exercise of their individual rights.\"92 Meanwhile, the Players Association would \" continue to seek improvements in pay and working conditions through the labor-management and collective bargaining processes.\"3 Experts with an understanding of Title IX law and gender discrimination suits claimed that the plaintiffs were making familiar arguments. Neena Chaudhry, National Women's Law Center general counsel, commented, \"These are the same kinds of arguments and claims that we still see at every level of education for women and girls, from K through 12 to college," and \" [i]t's unfortunately a sad continuation of the way that women and girls in sports are treated in the U.S.\"94 Carlos Cordeiro, who had taken over as the president of the USSF in the beginning of 2018, commented that he was \" surprised\" by the lawsuit?5 Cordeiro rejected the claims made by members of the WNT and said that \"US. Soccer believes that all female athletes deserve fair and equitable pay.\"95 The USSF's official response argued that "[t]he USWNT and USMNT play at different times, in different locations, against different opponents, and are comprised of athletes who have different obligations, are compensated in fundamentally different ways, and enjoy different benefits; thus, USWNT players have no male 'counterparts' who play for the USMNT."97 The USSF added that the women's team and the men's team \"receive fundamentally different pay structures for performing different work under their separate collective bargaining agreements.\"95 After the WNT successfully defended its title by winning the World Cup in July 2019, the public began to comment on the lawsuit. Proctor 3: Gamble donated $529,000 to the WNT Players Association and urged the USSF \" to be on the right side of history.\" 99 Moreover, the GOAL Act (Give Our Athletes Level Salaries Act) was introduced in the House of Representatives to "prohibit the use of funds for the 2026 World Cup unless the United States Soccer Federation provides equitable pay to the members of the United States Women's National Team and the United States Men's National Team.\"100 New mediation talks to resolve the dispute took place in August 2019.101 In advance of these talks, all 28 players sent the USSF Board of Directors a letter reminding them of pay complaints dating back to 1999 and urging them to \"direct [their] representatives to achieve a solution.\"102 (See Exhibit 4 for the text of this letter.) Absent an agreement, the lawsuit was scheduled to go to trial on May 5, 2020.103 The August mediation talks were not fruitful, however. The players' spokeswoman commented, It is clear that USSF, including its Board of Directors and President Carlos Cordeiro, fully intend to continue to compensate women players less than men. They will not succeed. We want all of our fans, sponsors, peers around the world, and women everywhere to know we are undaunted and will eagerly look forward to a jury trial.\" By contrast, the USSF's spokesman emphasized that \" [the USSF] value[s] our players and have continually shown that, by providing them with compensation and support that exceeds any other women's team in the world.\" The spokesman also indicated that the USSF "had hoped we would be able to address the issues in a respectful manner\" but that the WNT players' representatives \"took an aggressive and ultimately unproductive approach that follows months of presenting misleading information to the public in an effort to perpetuate confusion.\"105