Categories
Domestic Violence Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

The Waxman Cometh: London’s Commissioner for Which Victims, Exactly?

The Waxman Cometh: London’s Commissioner for Which Victims, Exactly?

Sean Parker

January 25, 2023

Claire Waxman is London’s first Victims Commissioner. In 2011, she won a case to overturn the decision not to prosecute her stalker, university friend Elliot Fogel.

Fogel was first convicted in 2003 over repeated phone calls. The former Sky Sports producer denied he had done anything wrong, but was convicted by a jury of stalking and breaching a restraining order.

Waxman was a contributor to a successful campaign for change in stalking laws, and in 2013 founded campaign group Voice4Victims to continue lobbying for legislation. V4V proposed victims’ rights amendments to the Policing and Crime Bill, passed in the House of Lords in 2016.

Also in 2016 V4V launched the Abuse of Process campaign, which aimed to tackle the problem of alleged victims being abused by alleged perpetrators through legal platforms. Whether this would be following verdict, when a complainant legally becomes a victim, is unclear. V4V also drafted the Sexual Offences Bill, to improve protection for alleged victims of rape and sexual assault. What, if any, connection Waxman has to Betsy Stanko (Operation Soteria grande fromage, charged with increasing UK sexual assault convictions) is as yet undeclared.

Waxman was subsequently reappointed by Sadiq Khan in May 2021. She claims to have undertaken work to transform the criminal justice system to provide a better experience for victims of crime, working alongside victims to amplify their voices, and promoting their interests throughout the ‘criminal justice journey’. Does this also include victims of false allegations of domestic violence and sexual assault, wrongful conviction or incarceration, or men and boys in general?

In December 2022 Waxman issued a series of social media posts that appeared to erase the existence of male victims of domestic abuse, and vilified men. Here are some examples:

  • December 7: “Our campaign is making a real difference in our fight to end the epidemic of male violence against women and girls for good.”
  • December 9: “We should reflect on Violence Against Women and Girls in the 21st Century, and the huge proportion of abuse that takes place online and using technology.”
  • December 12: “Much more must be done to tackle the harmful behaviors of men.”
  • December 14: “Zara’s future was stolen by a man with no regard for her life or the law.”
  • December 18: “We are in an epidemic of violence against women and girls.” December 19: “Everyone has a responsibility to challenge misogynistic views and attitudes.”

Also in 2022, Justice Secretary Dominic Raab declined to renew national Victims Commissioner Dame Vera Baird’s contract. Baird is a well-known radical feminist of the ages. See False Allegations Watch‘s annotated notes on a statement given during her tenure.

According to sources Claire Waxman has been used by the legal-dominance feminist lobby to campaign against the recognition of Parental Alienation in the Domestic Abuse Bill. She allegedly went to the President of the Family Division with a list of names of professionals working on Parental Alienation cases. The source suspected that this was why he referred to people having their professional reputation destroyed in a key speech on Parental Alienation in October 2021. The President didn’t take any action.

So the Victims Industry rolls on unquestioned, due to nobody in power wanting to be seen as denying alleged victims justice. But there are many kinds of victims, and in a world where good is bad, right is wrong, left is right and male can be female, there are also potentially 8 billion victims.

Subjectivity ultimately goes in only one direction – inwards; and let it not be forgotten that prisons also are full of ‘victims’. Those who are charged with creating alleged victims are by and large victims themselves, and even if they claim not to have been, have possibly not yet been correctly coerced into seeing themselves that way.

As is increasingly the case, it’s the terminology that’s the problem: If victimhood is seen as a monetisable virtue, then the image of wrongdoing, pain and suffering must be maintained at all costs, and for as long as possible. Otherwise any possible pretence or change of state might be seen through, and fatal doubt sown. Using negative experience as an emotional crutch is a very dangerous business, as crying wolf is a one-way street; once done, rarely recovered from. And don’t even start on the potential false memories in historical cases, or the social contagion of a million believed stories becoming the industrialised wheels before the new culture-wars ambulance-chasers (MeToo lawyers and their ilk).

Categories
Campus Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Office for Civil Rights Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

29 Recent Judicial Decisions Thwart Biden ‘Gender Agenda’

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

29 Recent Judicial Decisions Thwart Biden ‘Gender Agenda’

WASHINGTON / January 18, 2023 – The Biden Administration has issued several policy documents that are designed to promote the so-called “gender agenda” (1). In particular, on June 23, 2022 the Department of Education proposed a new Title IX regulation that would redefine the meaning of “sex,” limit free speech, and hobble due process protections (2).

In response, over 200 organizations (3), numerous state Attorneys General (4), and dozens of federal and state lawmakers (4) have spoken out in strong opposition to the draft regulation.

Since June 23, 2022, seven judicial decisions have been issued that thwart the Biden Administration’s attempts to expand the definition of “sex,” curtail free speech, and promote gender transitioning:

  1. State of Tennessee v. Department of Education, July 15, 2022: In response to a lawsuit by the Attorneys General of 20 states, the District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee granted a Preliminary Injunction against the Department of Education, blocking the DOE from implementing Biden’s Executive Order No. 13988, “Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.” (5)
  2. Franciscan Alliance and Christian Medical and Dental Society v. Becerra, August 26, 2022: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, located in New Orleans, unanimously ruled that doctors must be free to practice medicine without compulsion to perform gender-transition procedures. (6)
  3. Speech First v. Alexander Cartwright, September 23, 2022: The District Court for the Middle District of Florida ruled against the University of Central Florida for three campus policies that served to suppress student speech. (7)
  4. Neese v. Bercerra, October 14, 2022: The Northern District of Texas Court ruled that Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Title IX do not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The court set aside the contrary enforcement position taken by the Department of Health and Human Services. (8)
  5. Religious Sisters of Mercy et al v. Becerra, December 9, 2022: The Eighth Circuit Court in North Dakota overturned a rule under the Affordable Care Act, Section 1557, that would require “gender-transition procedures” be covered by health insurance plans. (9)
  6. Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County, December 30, 2022: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed the decision of the District Court, and upheld the policy of the St. Johns County School District in Florida, which denied transgender students access to the bathrooms consistent with their gender identity. (10)
  7. B.P.J. et al v. West Virginia State Board of Education, January 5, 2023: The Southern District Court of West Virginia ruled in favor of the “Save Women’s Sports Bill,” which defines “girl” and “woman” as biologically female for the purpose of secondary school sports. (11)

Since June 23, 2022, wrongfully accused students also have triumphed in 22 due process lawsuits against the following universities: University of California, University of Idaho Law School, Dartmouth College, Dordt University, SUNY-Purchase, Brown University (two lawsuits), Purdue University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Arizona,  University of Southern Florida, Western Michigan University, Prairie View A & M University, UC-Davis, Marshall University, University of Chicago, University of Connecticut, Emory University, Texas Christian University, Stonehill College, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Siena College. (12)

SAVE urges Congress to take necessary actions to discourage attempts by the Executive Branch to advance the gender agenda.

Links:

  1. https://www.heritage.org/gender/heritage-explains/the-lefts-new-gender-agenda
  2. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-Policy/
  4. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/attorneys-general-and-lawmakers/
  5. https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/pr/2022/pr22-23-order.pdf
  6. https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20220907161315/Franciscan-Opinion.pdf
  7. https://speechfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/64.-Dismissal-Settlement-1.pdf
  8. https://casetext.com/case/neese-v-becerra-1
  9. https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20221209161106/Sisters-of-Mercy-Opinion.pdf
  10. https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201813592.2.pdf
  11. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wvsd.231947/gov.uscourts.wvsd.231947.512.0.pdf
  12. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0
Categories
Campus Department of Education Due Process False Allegations Free Speech Gender Identity Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

A ‘Naked Assault on Civil Rights:’ Congress Must Stop Attempts to Hijack Title IX and Subvert the Constitution

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

A ‘Naked Assault on Civil Rights:’ Congress Must Stop Attempts to Hijack Title IX and Subvert the Constitution

WASHINGTON / January 12, 2023 – Title IX is the 50-year-old law that was enacted to stop sex discrimination in schools. But now, groups are attempting to use Title IX to promote a sweeping unconstitutional agenda with harmful effects on students, families, and on society.

Recent months have witnessed three attempts to make far-reaching changes to Title IX:

  1. In June, the Department of Education proposed a new Title IX regulation that would redefine the meaning of “sex,” muzzle free speech, and decimate due process (1).
  2. In September, 19 Democratic senators denounced the presumption of innocence in Title IX proceedings (2). The senators also called for an end to cross-examination, facilely ignoring a landmark Supreme Court decision that described cross-examination as the “‘greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” (3)
  3. In December, the Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act was introduced in both chambers of Congress (4). The bill proposed to make sweeping changes to campus Title IX adjudication procedures — changes that are reminiscent of practices seen in the former Soviet Union (5).

The proposals would curtail constitutionally protected free speech and due process protections, eliminate fairness in women’s sports, promote gender transitioning among under-age students, marginalize the role of parents, and exact other harmful effects. Numerous lawmakers have spoken out in opposition to these proposed changes (6).

These changes recently were described by a leading policy organization as a “naked assault on civil rights.” (7)

In response to these and other worrisome developments, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy proposed a multi-point Commitment to America (8). Five of the principles pertain to the recent attempts to reinvent Title IX:

  1. Conduct rigorous oversight to rein in governmental abuse of power, such as an executive branch agency exceeding its legal authority by seeking to redefine the meaning of “sex” (9).
  2. Curb wasteful spending by government agencies, such as the Department of Education (10).
  3. Advance the Parents’ Bill of Rights (11).
  4. Defend fairness by ensuring that only women can compete in women’s sports (12).
  5. Uphold free speech guarantees and assure religious freedom (13).

SAVE urges members of Congress to move quickly to implement provisions of the Commitment to America and stop the Title IX take-over.

Links:

  1. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  2. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/24/senate_democrats_and_title_ix_148234.html
  3. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/399/149/
  4. https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr9387/BILLS-117hr9387ih.pdf
  5. https://www.saveservices.org/2022/12/rigged-safer-act-bears-eerie-resemblance-to-soviet-era-legal-system/
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/attorneys-general-and-lawmakers/
  7. https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2023/01/the-empress-wears-no-clothes/
  8. https://www.republicanleader.gov/commitment/
  9. https://spectator.org/administrative-redefine-gender/
  10. https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget23/justifications/z-ocr.pdf
  11. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/6056
  12. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/womens-sports/
  13. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/First-Liberty-Institute-Statement-on-Title-IX.pdf
Categories
Campus Due Process False Allegations Investigations Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Trauma Informed

Rigged: SAFER Act Bears Eerie Resemblance to Soviet-Era Legal System

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Rigged: SAFER Act Bears Eerie Resemblance to Soviet-Era Legal System

WASHINGTON / December 15, 2022 — The Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act (1) was recently introduced in the Senate (S. 5158) and House of Representatives (H.R. 9387). The bill proposes to make numerous changes to campus Title IX adjudication procedures that would tilt the process in favor of the complainant. The changes are reminiscent of practices often seen in the former Soviet Union.

In the Soviet Union, Lavrentiy Beria, head of Stalin’s secret police, often boasted, “Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.”  Similarly, the SAFER Act would provide complainants a broad array of supports and protections, leaving accused persons to their own devices. (Section 205)

In the Soviet Union, “all aspects of the Soviet legal system were effectively subordinate to the leadership of the Soviet Communist Party,” according to University of Illinois law professor Peter Maggs (2).  On college campuses, ideologically committed Title IX coordinators wield enormous control over the processing of complaints. Under SAFER, their power would further expand to have a say over “teaching practices, textbooks, and curricula.” (Section 206)

In the Soviet Union, false allegations were rampant. Similarly, 40-50% of sexual assault allegations on American college campuses are known to be unfounded (3). Ironically, the SAFER Act would discourage a school from disciplining a person who makes a false allegation. (Section 205)

In the Soviet Union, investigators would slant their methods in order to reach a predetermined conclusion of guilt. Under the SAFER Act, campus investigators would be mandated to use “trauma-informed interview techniques” — methods that would further tilt what already is a biased Title IX process (4). (Section 205)

In the Soviet Union, “there was severe pressure from the party hierarchy to secure a 100 percent conviction rate, with the result that thereafter there were almost no acquittals.” (2) In the United States, Oberlin College once boasted it had a 100% conviction rate for Title IX cases (5).

As if to underscore the irrelevance of the SAFER bill, in three separate decisions this past week, federal judges issued rulings that illustrate the due process deficiencies of campus “kangaroo courts:”

  • The First Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court decision, and ruled against Stonehill College of Massachusetts for its deeply flawed adjudication methods (6).
  • Judge Reed O’Connor issued a ruling against Texas Christian University, finding that TCU had instructed that exculpatory evidence for the man was “not to [be] consider[ed],” “discussed or referenced” by the Title IX panel (7).
  • The District Court of Western Wisconsin ruled against the University of Wisconsin-Madison for various procedural errors against a male student that constituted sex discrimination (8).

SAVE urges lawmakers to oppose the SAFER Act.

Links:

  1. https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr9387/BILLS-117hr9387ih.pdf
  2. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Soviet-law/Property
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2021/05/pr-40-50-of-campus-sexual-assault-allegations-are-unfounded-revealing-need-for-strong-protections-of-the-innocent/
  4. http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/sa/trauma-informed/
  5. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/4/oberlin-college-sex-assault-conviction-rate-100/
  6. http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/21-1227P-01A.pdf
  7. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.361429/gov.uscourts.txnd.361429.175.0.pdf
  8. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wiwd.47298/gov.uscourts.wiwd.47298.25.0.pdf
Categories
Campus Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process False Allegations Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault Title IX

Lawsuit Against USF Moves Forward, Sending a Message that Schools Must Not Take Short-Cuts on Due Process Protections

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@endtodv.org

Lawsuit Against USF Moves Forward, Sending a Message that Schools Must Not Take Short-Cuts on Due Process Protections

WASHINGTON / October 24, 2022 – Last week U.S. District Judge Scriven issued a ruling in a sexual assault case, denying the University of South Florida its Motion to Dismiss. The decision in favor of former USF student Kevaughn Dingle will allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial, if the university does not opt to settle the case (1).

The complaint arose from a sexual encounter in which the female student was the initiator (2). She entered the dormitory room of Dingle, a Black man, removed his shirt, expressed her sexual excitement, asked the man to text someone for a condom, and performed fellatio on him.

An hour later, she told some friends she “might have been sexually assaulted,” and filed a Title IX complaint.

During the Title IX proceeding, USF restricted Dingle’s review of the file, denied him the right to cross-examine the accuser, and even revoked his right to appeal.

In addition, USF misinterpreted its definition of consent. Specifically, USF’s Title IX Office defined consent as “words and/or actions that clearly indicate a willingness to engage in a specific sexual activity… at some point during the interaction or thereafter.” In contrast, USF’s determination letter faulted the man based on what the school referred to as a lack of “ongoing affirmative consent.”  [emphasis added]

As a consequence, USF found Dingle responsible of sexual assault, expelled him, and stripped him of his football scholarship.

In addition, Dingle was arrested by local police on sexual assault charges, which were eventually dropped (3).

Dingle’s experience is not uncommon. Since the Department of Education issued its “Dear Colleague Letter” in 2011, 814 similar lawsuits have been filed (4). As a consequence, 44 judicial decisions have been issued against colleges finding sex bias against the male student (5).

While Black men make up only about six percent of college undergraduates, they are substantially overrepresented in the Title IX proceedings (6).  Among the 30% of cases in which the race of the accused student was known, black students are four times as likely as white students to file lawsuits alleging due process violations (7).

Citations:

  1. https://api.knack.com/v1/applications/56f5e6b2c3ffa97c68039523/download/asset/634c9f3ed7cdbc00211e7088/797ordermtd10142022.pdf
  2. https://api.knack.com/v1/applications/56f5e6b2c3ffa97c68039523/download/asset/61b67ae860f2970021b6a1a1/797complaint1282021.pdf
  3. https://www.thedailystampede.com/2018/3/30/17180320/kevaughn-dingle-has-all-felony-sexual-battery-charges-dropped
  4. https://titleixforall.com/title-ix-recap-what-happened-in-september-2022/
  5. https://www.saveservices.org/2022/04/44-judicial-decisions/
  6. https://www.realcleareducation.com/articles/2019/01/21/black_men_title_nine_and_the_disparate_impact_of_discipline_policies_110308.html
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2020/07/why-are-some-members-of-congress-opposing-due-process-protections-for-black-male-students/
Categories
Bills Campus Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process False Allegations Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

Ignoring Wave of Attacks on Campus Due Process, Lawmakers Introduce Bill to Help ‘Survivors.’

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Ignoring Wave of Attacks on Campus Due Process, Lawmakers Introduce Bill to Help ‘Survivors,’ For the Fifth Time

WASHINGTON / October 10, 2022 – Basic principles of “due process” on campus are being challenged by a growing number of frivolous and false Title IX complaints. Despite these developments, Congressional lawmakers introduced last week the Campus Accountability and Safety Act, a bill that does nothing to shore up due process protections.

Due process, enshrined in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, serves to protect innocent citizens from false accusations. But a review of recent Title IX complaints reveals that female students increasingly are resorting to Title IX as a weapon to settle old scores.

For example, Clemson University student Erin Wingo initiated a sexual encounter with a male acquaintance. But worried that her boyfriend might learn of the tryst, Wingo fabricated an allegation of sexual assault. A South Carolina jury later awarded the male student $5.3 million for defamation (1).

In another case, the male student was taking a medication that precluded his ability to have intercourse— but that did not deter an accusation of “rape” from being filed by the female student. In other recent complaints, there is no allegation of intimate sexual contact. Rather, the complaint centers around vague and unverifiable claims of “harassment.”

In addition, recent developments reveal that certain groups are seeking to roll back fundamental due process protections:

  1. The Department of Education released a draft Title IX regulation in June that was widely criticized for its removal of key due process protections. One letter from 19 state Attorneys General charged, “The Proposed Rule threatens to destroy Title IX.” (2)
  2. The presumption of innocence has long been seen as the bedrock to due process (3). Nonetheless, 12 Democratic Senators submitted a letter calling on the Department of Education to remove any ”presumption that the respondent is not responsible for sex discrimination until a determination is made.” (4) This extreme position provoked the ire of leading liberal commentators (5).

Ignoring these worrisome threats to due process, last week federal lawmakers introduced the Campus Accountability and Safety Act (6). The bill had been introduced, unsuccessfully, in four previous sessions of Congress (7).

The House bill was co-sponsored by Representatives Carolyn Maloney and John Katko, neither of whom will be serving in Congress next year. Announced five weeks before the highly contested November 8 elections, the bill has little chance of being passed into law in the current session of Congress.

“The truth is that there is no crisis in sexual assault on campus,” notes a leading Title IX attorney. “Title IX teaches women to blame the guy instead of accepting her share of responsibility for the failed relationship.”

Citations:

  1. https://www.saveservices.org/2022/04/south-carolina-jury-awards-5-3-million-to-wrongfully-accused-clemson-u-student-on-defamation-and-civil-conspiracy-claims/
  2. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/executive-management/Title%20IX%20NPRM%20Indiana%20Comment%20Letter%20FINAL.pdf
  3. http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/innocence/cornerstone/
  4. https://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/220912%20Title%20IX%20Comment%20Letter.pdf
  5. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/24/senate_democrats_and_title_ix_148234.html
  6. https://maloney.house.gov/sites/maloney.house.gov/files/final%20casa.pdf
  7. https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-gillibrand-reintroduce-bipartisan-bill-to-combat-sexual-assault-on-college-campuses
Categories
Campus Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

Attorneys General School the DOE on Meaning of ‘Free Speech,’ ‘Due Process,’ and ‘Constitutional Rights’

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Attorneys General School the DOE on Meaning of ‘Free Speech,’ ‘Due Process,’ and ‘Constitutional Rights’

WASHINGTON / September 19, 2022 – The Attorneys General from 18 states have submitted comments to the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), in response to a proposed Title IX regulation that has stimulated widespread debate and opposition (1). The Attorneys’ General comments represent a tutorial on the meaning and application of First and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees in the higher education setting.

  1. The first letter, signed by the Attorneys General of MT, AL, AR, GA, IN, KS, KY, LA, MS, NE, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, and VA, first analyzes the DOE proposal to vastly expand the definition of sexual harassment. This change would “chill the free exchange of ideas,” which would “intimidate students and faculty into keeping quiet on controversial issues.” (2)

The letter then deplores the rule’s plan to remove or modify important due process safeguards, including advance disclosure of evidence, impartial investigations, key written notice provisions, and live hearings. Cumulatively, these changes are “reminiscent of Star Chambers” that “stacked the deck against accused students.” The 37-page letter concludes, “In many instances, moreover, the Department’s Proposed Rule conflicts with the text, purpose, and longstanding interpretation of Title IX.”

  1. The second letter charges the draft regulation lacks a clear statement of authority from Congress, and highlights the proposed rule’s unlawful attempt to preempt state laws that protect the rights of females. Signed by the Attorneys General of IN, AL, AZ, AR, GA, KS, KY, LA, MS, MT, NE, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, and WV, the letter concludes simply, “The Proposed Rule threatens to destroy Title IX.” (3)
  2. Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas flatly charges the Biden proposal will “destroy constitutional rights.” (4) AG Paxton’s letter to the DOE concludes tartly, “the Proposed Rule promises to repeat the mistakes of the Department’s ill-advised 2011 Dear Colleague Letter.” (5)

All three letters sharply criticize the DOE plan to expand the definition of “sex” to include “gender identity.” Noting that the draft policy lacks definitions of “sex” or “gender identity,” the first letter notes that the Department of Education “simply waves its hand and—by regulatory fiat—alters a fundamental term, as if its novel definition was axiomatic.” (2)

The first letter also highlights the role of Catherine Lhamon, who served as the DOE Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights from 2013 to 2017, and was re-appointed to the same position in 2021. During the earlier period, the letter notes that Lhamon played the lead role in creating a “constitutional and regulatory mess.”

Citations:

  1. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/
  2. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/executive-management/Montana%20Coalition%20Title%20IX%20Comment%20FINAL%209.12.22.pdf
  3. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/executive-management/Title%20IX%20NPRM%20Indiana%20Comment%20Letter%20FINAL.pdf
  4. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/paxton-slams-biden-administration-its-radical-attempt-redefine-biology-destroy-constitutional-rights
  5. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/executive-management/20220912%20Paxton%20Title%20IX%20Comment.pdf
Categories
Campus Due Process False Allegations Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

Falsely Accused Day Spotlights Growing Exasperation of Judges and Juries with Pernicious Problem that Affects 20 Million

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@endtodv.org

Falsely Accused Day Spotlights Growing Exasperation of Judges and Juries with Pernicious Problem that Affects 20 Million

WASHINGTON / August 29, 2022 – This past week, First Circuit Court Judge Bruce Selya issued a milestone ruling in a case involving an MIT student accused of nonconsensual sexual behavior (1). The opinion will allow accused students who contend the accusation is false to file a lawsuit using a pseudonym. Being publicly viewed as a “sex offender” can represent an impediment to such students claiming the university failed to uphold due process protections.

The decision represents the latest in a string of victories by accused students who initiate legal action against their former schools. Over the past decade, judges have ruled in favor of the accused student in 238 cases (2). Many of these cases have been compiled and summarized in the SAVE publication, “Analysis of Judicial Decisions Affirming the 2020 Title IX Regulation” (3).

In South Carolina, student Erin Wingo claimed she was a victim of non-consensual sexual assault. Wingo filed a complaint with the Clemson University Title IX office, resulting in the suspension of the alleged “rapist” from the school. After the suspension was finalized, Wingo’s boyfriend sent the accused student this revelatory text message: “You’re innocent. I lied in that hearing. Erin wanted to have sex that night.” The accused man then filed a defamation lawsuit against Wingo. On March 25, 2022, the jury announced a stunning $5.3 million award against the woman (4).

More recently, a Virginia jury awarded $15 million to actor Johnny Depp for defamatory claims of domestic violence made by Amber Heard in a Washington Post editorial (5).

The high dollar value of the South Carolina and Virginia awards reflects a growing public impatience with the widespread problem of false allegations. A 2020 national survey found that 8% of Americans — 11% of men and 6% of women — report being falsely accused of sexual assault, domestic violence, or child abuse. The 8% figure represents 20.4 million adults (6).

False allegations can have a range of serious consequences including loss of family relationships, social stigmatization, impairment of career opportunities, and mental health problems (7). In response, New York (8), Iowa (9), and California (10) have enacted laws designed to sanction false accusers.

Falsely Accused Day will be observed on Friday, September 9. Falsely Accused Day will be marked by events held in the United States (11) and in other countries around the world (12).

Citations:

  1. https://blog.simplejustice.us/2022/08/25/first-circuit-upholds-student-anonymity-in-title-ix-challenge/
  2. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Analysis-of-Title-IX-Regulation-3.24.2022.pdf
  4. https://www.saveservices.org/2022/04/south-carolina-jury-awards-5-3-million-to-wrongfully-accused-clemson-u-student-on-defamation-and-civil-conspiracy-claims/
  5. https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/johnny-depp-verdict-amber-heard-lawsuit-defamation-damages/
  6. http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/pr/survey-over-20-million-have-been-falsely-accused-of-abuse/
  7. https://factuk.org/the-suffering-of-the-wrongfully-accused/
  8. https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s8492
  9. https://openstates.org/ia/bills/2021-2022/HF821/
  10. https://calstate.policystat.com/policy/8453518/latest/
  11. https://www.dosomethingforourmen.com/
  12. https://falselyaccusedday.org/
Categories
Campus Free Speech Gender Identity Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

Flawed Biden Proposal May Irreparably Harm Title IX. Lawmakers Are Urged to File Comments.

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Flawed Biden Proposal May Irreparably Harm Title IX. Lawmakers Are Urged to File Comments.

WASHINGTON / August 22, 2022 – The Biden Title IX proposal is attracting a growing wave of criticism by lawmakers, attorneys general, 150 organizations, and editorialists (1). The criticisms underscore a concern that the Department of Education proposal is so deeply flawed that it is discrediting the nation’s broader effort to end sex discrimination. SAVE invites lawmakers around the nation to file Comments urging that the Department of Education withdraw its ill-considered proposal.

The federal Title IX law states, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

But the Biden draft Title IX regulation, released on June 23, ignores the plain language and clear intent of the Title IX law, which is designed to curb sex discrimination against males and females.

By means of 175 lawsuit decisions, federal judges have delineated a series of due process protections to protect male students from false allegations (2). In a recent editorial, Rick Manning, president of Americans for Limited Government, accused the Department of Education of promoting “guilty without remorse regulations” in which the “concept of justice in America is turned on its head.” (3)

Equally strong criticisms have been leveled by advocates for women’s rights. The Independent Women’s Voice, for example, charges the Biden proposal will “subvert” the rights of parents and “destroy” the purpose of Title IX (4).

The Biden Title IX plan proposes to alter the definition of “sex” to include “gender identity.” This signifies a repudiation of congressional intent, which never contemplated such a change.

The proposed “gender identity” language would provide a formidable legal foundation to the “gender identity movement” (5). Recent articles have documented how the gender identity movement has established a presence in schools across the nation:

  • Nationwide, the GSA Network serves as an umbrella organization for more than 4,000 “gender and sexuality alliances” in 40 states. The organization recommends that school advisors not advise parents about their child’s participation in such clubs (6).
  • In California, the Sacramento City Unified School District has adopted a “queer theory–based pedagogy that encourages teachers to ‘normalize gender exploration,’ confront their ‘cisgender privilege,’ and maintain strict secrecy when facilitating a child’s gender or sexual transition.” (7)
  • In Oregon, the Portland public schools have launched a new curriculum that teaches students to ”begin exploring ‘the infinite gender spectrum.’” (8)

Under the Biden plan, questioning such initiatives would constitute sex discrimination and therefore be illegal. This would violate First Amendment free speech guarantees (9).

Lawmakers are called upon to submit Comments to the Department of Education, urging the DOE to abandon its deeply flawed proposal. Step-by-step instructions to submit Comments are available online (10).

The deadline to submit Comments is September 12.

Citations:

  1. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/
  2. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Analysis-of-Title-IX-Regulation-3.24.2022.pdf
  3. https://dailytorch.com/2022/08/bidens-education-department-seeks-to-end-due-process-under-title-ix-for-college-students/
  4. https://www.iwv.org/campaign/save-our-schools-take-back-title-ix/
  5. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01550366
  6. https://www.city-journal.org/gsa-clubs-smuggle-gender-ideology-into-k-12-education
  7. https://www.city-journal.org/how-gender-radicalism-conquered-sacramento-schools
  8. https://www.city-journal.org/in-portland-the-sexual-revolution-starts-in-kindergarten
  9. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/biden-and-universities-launch-sneak-attack-on-free-speech/
  10. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-Policy/Comments/
Categories
Campus Department of Education Due Process Office for Civil Rights Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

Relentless Pressure on Colleges and Universities to End Campus ‘Kangaroo Courts’

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Relentless Pressure on Colleges and Universities to End Campus ‘Kangaroo Courts’

WASHINGTON / August 18, 2022 – As the new academic year approaches, SAVE is urging school administrators to exercise greater oversight over their Title IX offices to bring an end to the notorious “Kangaroo Courts.” Several developments during the Summer months highlight the growing pressures on institutions to assure fairness in Title IX proceedings:

Judicial Deference: On June 2, Second Circuit Appellate Judge Jose Cabranes issued a concurrence that compared campus disciplinary committees to the infamous English Star Chambers and warned, “[T]hese threats to due process and academic freedom are matters of life and death for our great universities.” (1) The continued wave of Title IX lawsuits has eroded the long-standing notion of judicial deference to institutions of higher education.

State Legislation: On June 15, Louisiana Governor John Edwards signed the “Student Due Process and Protection Act” into law (2). The campus bill had been approved in both the House and the Senate without a single opposing vote. To date, 11 states have enacted legislation that mandate campus due process protections (3).

Presumption of Innocence: A national survey conducted in June for SAVE by YouGov found that 87% of respondents support a presumption of innocence for college disciplinary hearings (4).

Lawsuit: On July 20, Judge CJ Williams of the District Court of Northern Iowa handed down a decision against Fordt University that documented widespread procedural irregularities (5). The decision was one of the most sweeping Title IX rulings issued in the past decade.

DC Rally: An August 11 rally held in Washington, DC featured several presentations on the need for greater attention to campus fairness (6). Teresa Manning of the National Association of Scholars highlighted how campus due process rights “protect the lone individual up against powerful institutions like government and schools.” (7)

Student Enrollments: The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center reports that “postsecondary institutions have lost nearly 1.3 million students since spring 2020.” (8) Negative media coverage of unconstitutional Title IX procedures is likely to worsen the problem of declining student enrollments, especially among male students.

This past week in Ithaca, New York, a person dressed as a kangaroo made an appearance on the campus of Cornell University. Sponsored by the New Civil Liberties Alliance, the kangaroo charged, “If you have a Title IX sexual misconduct complaint filed against you, chances are you will not get a fair hearing.” (9)

SAVE’s “Analysis of Judicial Decisions Affirming the 2020 Title IX Regulation” summarizes 175 Title IX decisions favorable to the accused student (10).

Citations:

  1. https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/20-1514_complete_opn.pdf
  2. https://legiscan.com/LA/bill/HB364/2022
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/title-ix-regulation/state-laws/
  4. https://www.saveservices.org/2022/06/63-of-americans-oppose-expanding-definition-of-sex-to-include-gender-identity/
  5. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.iand.56248/gov.uscourts.iand.56248.72.0.pdf
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/rally/
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2022/08/biden-title-ix-take-over-threatens-due-process-the-most-fundamental-legal-right/
  8. https://nscresearchcenter.org/current-term-enrollment-estimates/
  9. https://www.facebook.com/NewCivilLibertiesAlliance/posts/pfbid0UeK6mHrsqrbTCNkjaFHnxSdXfXAxizoNt5bDgUivEm3itYsGnvuj3WQjM8AWM5eNl
  10. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Analysis-of-Title-IX-Regulation-3.24.2022.pdf