San José State University is refusing to hand over internal emails tied to its investigation of head volleyball coach Todd Kress, telling a reporter that the messages are shielded by privacy rules and legal privilege. The denial, issued in response to a public-records request, keeps campus correspondence under wraps at the same time the university and the California State University system are locked in a separate legal fight with the federal government over the women’s volleyball program.
Records withheld under privacy and privilege
After a June public-records request, the university’s legal office responded that the requested communications implicate substantial privacy interests and are covered by attorney-client privilege and personnel-privacy exemptions, according to reporting by OutKick. The outlet reported that it sought emails linked to an Oct. 24, 2024 complaint and that SJSU’s public-records office formally denied the request on June 22, 2026.
The written denial, signed by university counsel J. Leah Castella, said she had reviewed the materials and applied the statutory balancing test before deciding to withhold them, OutKick reported. For now, that keeps internal back-and-forth about the complaint out of public view.
Decision lands amid federal Title IX fight
The records fight is unfolding as SJSU and the CSU system challenge a Department of Education finding that the university violated Title IX in its handling of the women’s volleyball program. The campus and the system have gone to court to block federal enforcement of that finding, according to the university.
In a message to the campus community, SJSU said it "vigorously disputes" the conclusions of the Department’s Office for Civil Rights and has asked the agency to rescind its findings, as outlined by SJSU NewsCenter and the California State University system’s public FAQ. The federal action has already drawn local attention, including a prior Hoodline report on the case, accusing SJSU of Title IX violations involving a transgender athlete.
Allegations date to the 1998 season
According to reporting, the requested records include a letter sent to SJSU on Oct. 24, 2024 by a woman who played for Kress at Fairfield University in 1998. In that letter, she described alleged non-consensual conduct by the coach during a team trip after Fairfield’s first-round NCAA tournament loss.
The former player recounted that Kress smeared caramel in her hair, forced her onto a bed, and later held her in a bathtub while threatening to turn on the water, OutKick reported. The outlet said it was independently provided copies of emails between the former player and SJSU, and that athletic director Jeff Konya acknowledged receiving her correspondence.
Legal backdrop: privacy vs. public interest
Under California’s public-records laws, agencies can withhold or redact documents when individual privacy interests are found to outweigh the public’s right to know, and requesters can ask a court to step in and decide. The Public Records Act has been recodified as Government Code section 7920 et seq., and state guidance describes a case-by-case balancing test for personnel and investigatory files, according to California GovOps and open-government experts.
Newsroom legal guides note that judges often look at whether records would shed light on how a public agency handled safety complaints before ordering them released. That means SJSU’s decision to keep the Kress-related emails under wraps could ultimately be tested in court.
What to watch next
With the documents still sealed, transparency advocates and some former players argue that critical questions remain about how SJSU responded to complaints about its volleyball program. The university, for its part, maintains that privacy protections and privileged communications must not be sacrificed in the process.
The dispute over records is playing out against the larger backdrop of the federal enforcement battle and CSU’s lawsuit, which has put SJSU’s decision-making under a national microscope, according to coverage by the Los Angeles Times and earlier reporting by The Washington Post. If a requester decides to sue, a judge would have the final say on whether the public interest in campus safety and institutional accountability outweighs SJSU’s asserted privacy and privilege claims.
