News and Commentary

Campus Department of Education Due Process Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Popular Support for Campus ‘Kangaroo Courts’ is Collapsing

Sharing is caring!


Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335


Popular Support for Campus ‘Kangaroo Courts’ is Collapsing

WASHINGTON / January 24, 2024 – Campus Kangaroo Courts have reached the point that even the kangaroos are becoming embarrassed. Case in point is a recent judicial decision involving the University of Illinois.

Last week, Judge Colleen Lawless granted a restraining order against the university, allowing Terrence Shannon to return to his classes and varsity sports activities. In her decision, Judge Lawless enumerated a lengthy list of due process violations (1):

  • Shannon had not been informed of the accuser’s name or given access to the evidence used against him.
  • The university did not investigate the allegation or “weigh the credibility of the evidence in light of the nature of the allegation.”
  • Shannon had not been allowed to attend the hearing.
  • The university issued its ruling “without any findings of fact or reasoning for the decision.”

When Shannon rejoined his team on the court, the crowd greeted him with whistles, towel-waving, and sustained applause (2).

In years past, a student accused of sexual assault likely would have faced fevered protests and petitions demanding his immediate removal (3). But the tide of public opinion is turning.

One lawsuit recently filed against George Mason University opened with this laughable introduction (4):

“George Mason University would rather lose in court than lose in the press. In its handling of false misconduct allegations against Mr. Wright, the University repeatedly and flagrantly violated Title IX regulations and its own policies. In a clear showing of bias, the University hosted Mr. Wright’s false accuser as a #metoo speaker on campus, paid her and her co-conspirator hundreds of thousands of dollars each, made public statements in support of her and against Mr. Wright, retaliated against him for his lawsuit, and used different standards.”

The Title IX high-jinks are taking a financial toll, as well.

In August, a jury awarded $4 million to Peter Steele whose sexual assault case was mishandled by Pacific University, ruling the institution had intentionally caused the man emotional distress (5).

Then in December, a Philadelphia jury awarded Dr. John Abraham a record-setting $15 million award for egregious Title IX offenses by Thomas Jefferson University (6).

Even state Supreme Courts are losing patience with Title IX over-reach. In June, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that Yale University’s Title IX procedures “lacked important procedural safeguards,” opening the door to costly defamation lawsuits against the institution (7).

Then in January, the Washington Supreme Court weighed in, ruling that Washington State University was not liable for protecting a student from a sexual assault that occurred off-campus (8).

Attorney Scott Greenfield has posited that “activists sought to increase their powers on campus to control the actions of their male peers, while ignoring whether it had anything to do with the purposes of Title IX” (9).  Indeed, there is a growing perception that campus Title IX offices are staffed by gender ideologues, not legal professionals (10).