Categories
Uncategorized

Blue State AGs Want To Limit College Students’ Due Process Rights. Red State AGs Are Fighting Back

by Ashe Schow

A group of 18 Blue State attorneys general filed a lawsuit against U.S. Department of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos earlier this month to try and block new regulations that would provide much needed due process to college students accused of sexual assault.

The lawsuit is meant to delay the final rule’s implementation at least until after the November election, with filers hoping former Vice President Joe Biden will become president and cancel the rule all together.

As Inside Higher Ed reported earlier this month, the lawsuit claims the new rules would “reverse decades of effort to end the corrosive effects of sexual harassment on equal access to education,” ignoring the fact that denying due process makes it easier for false accusations to limit access to education and does nothing to stop actual sexual harassment.

The AGs also took issue with the fact that the new regulations limit who can make an accusation (the new rules state the accuser must be a student of the school), are unfair. The whole point of Title IX wading into sexual harassment and assault was to claim accusers had their educational opportunities limited by a college that ignored their sexual assault claims. If the accuser isn’t even a student, their educational opportunities can’t be limited by a school they don’t attend.

The AGs that filed the lawsuit were all from Democrat states: California, Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Last week, a coalition of Red State AGs filed a brief defending the new regulations.

The new rule, the AGs wrote, “requires educational institutions to investigate and, where proved, punish allegations of sufficiently severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive sexual harassment. It also provides a needed framework, consistent with long-standing Supreme Court precedent, that protects the foundational constitutional rights of due process and speech.”

The AGs take particular issue with the notion that because the adjudications can’t result in jail time (at least the schools can’t impose such a punishment, they can and do send information gathered to police in order to circumvent students’ constitutional due process rights), then due process isn’t necessary or can be severely limited.

“The need for procedural due process only increases in the context of sexual harassment and misconduct. Although not a criminal proceeding outright, the underlying act at issue in a harassment-related disciplinary hearing overlaps with illegal conduct. A finding of guilt attaches a special stigma to the accused party that will stay with them well after they exit campus,” the AGs wrote.

They also quoted a ruling against Brandeis University from an accused student. The judge in that case wrote, “If a college student is to be marked for life as a sexual predator, it is reasonable to require that he be provided a fair opportunity to defend himself and an impartial arbiter to make that decision.”

The AGs writing in support of the final rule are from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas.

The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.

Categories
Campus Civil Rights Due Process False Allegations Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

Why Are Some Members of Congress Opposing Due Process Protections for Black Male Students?

SAVE

July 14, 2020

During the Senate HELP Committee’s 2015 hearing on campus sexual assault, Harvard Law Professor Janet Halley made the surprising observation that in her experience, “male students of color are accused and punished at ‘unreasonably high rates’ in campus sexual misconduct investigations.” (1) Two years later, journalist Emily Yoffe posed this question in The Atlantic: “Is the system biased against men of color?” explaining, “black men make up only about 6 percent of college undergraduates, yet are vastly overrepresented in the cases I’ve tracked.” (2) Lara Bazelon, director of the racial justice clinics at the University of San Francisco School of Law, likewise has opined about the troubling racial dynamics at play under the current Title IX system, and urged Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to “take important steps to fix these problems.” (3)

During this time of national reflection on race relationships, stories mount of black men whose lives were irrevocably harmed by false allegations or poorly administered campus tribunals (4). The examples of unfair treatment are numerous and egregious:

  • Two years ago, Nikki Yovino was sentenced to one year in jail for falsely accusing two black male football players, students at Sacred Heart University, of sexual assault (5).
  • Grant Neal, a black student athlete suspended by Colorado State University-Pueblo for a rape his white partner denied ever happened, sued and settled with his university (6).
  • Two black male students accused of sexual assault recently settled a lawsuit against University of Findlay for racial, gender, and ethnic discrimination (7).

Black faculty members also have been targeted by the campus kangaroo courts. The nation’s first elected black governor, former Virginia Governor L. Douglas Wilder, penned a scathing letter regarding his “unimaginable nightmare at Virginia Commonwealth University” after he was erroneously accused of sexual misconduct. He aptly titled his letter, “Secretary DeVos Right to Restore Due Process on Campus.” (9) Similarly, Howard University castigated law professor Reginald Robinson for allegations of sexual harassment, although his actions were clearly an expression of academic freedom consistent with university policy. (10)

So how widespread is the problem?

In 2017, the Office for Civil Rights investigated Colgate University for potential race discrimination in its sexual assault adjudication process. During the course of the investigation, the institution had to reveal the embarrassing fact that “black male students were accused of 50% of the sexual violations reported to the university,” (11) even though black students represent only 5.2% of all undergraduate students (12).

More recently, Title IX For All analyzed demographic data from the approximately 650 lawsuits filed against institutions of higher education since 2011. 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 their rights were violated in Title IX disciplinary proceedings. Title IX For All concludes, “These findings come at a time when public officials who have long regarded themselves as champions of civil rights for minorities suspected or accused of crimes advocate a heightened awareness of their rights, while simultaneously working to undermine their rights in higher education settings.” (13)

The new Title IX regulation will ensure fairness, equitability, and credibility, and will support and assist sexual assault complainants, as well (14). Some members of Congress in both the Senate (15) and the House of Representatives (16) have urged Secretary DeVos to rescind the new regulation with vague claims that it is harmful to students.

At a time when activists across the country are clamoring that Black Lives Matter, why are some members of Congress opposed to a regulation that will help improve the lives of black men?

Citations:

  1. https://www.thecollegefix.com/shut-out-of-sexual-assault-hearing-critics-of-pro-accuser-legislation-flood-senate-committee-with-testimony/
  2. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/09/the-question-of-race-in-campus-sexual-assault-cases/539361/
  3. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/04/opinion/-title-ix-devos-democrat-feminist.html
  4. https://www.thecollegefix.com/believe-the-survivor-heres-11-times-young-black-men-were-railroaded-by-campus-sexual-assault-claims/
  5. https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Yovino-sentenced-to-1-year-in-false-rape-case-13177363.php
  6. https://www.thecollegefix.com/athlete-accused-rape-colorado-state-not-sex-partner-getting-paid-drop-lawsuit/
  7. https://pulse.findlay.edu/2019/around-campus/university-of-findlay-settles-sexual-assault-case/
  8. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2020/07/02/sexual-assault-title-ix-due-process-betsy-devos-column/3281103001/
  9. http://www.saveservices.org/2020/06/secretary-devos-right-to-restore-due-process-on-campus/
  10. https://www.thefire.org/law-professor-still-subject-to-sanctions-from-howard-university-for-brazilian-wax-hypothetical-on-quiz/
  11. https://reason.com/2017/09/14/we-need-to-talk-about-black-students-bei/
  12. https://www.colgate.edu/about/offices-centers-institutes/provost-and-dean-faculty/equity-and-diversity/demographics#students
  13. https://www.titleixforall.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Plaintiff-Demographics-by-Race-and-Sex-Title-IX-Lawsuits-2020-7-6.pdf
  14. http://www.saveservices.org/2020/05/analysis-new-title-ix-regulation-will-support-and-assist-complainants-in-multiple-ways/
  15. https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?id=CB2CFAD7-4FF7-400D-A8E5-CA2D5857072B
  16. https://speier.house.gov/2020/5/reps-speier-kuster-pressley-and-slotkin-lead-letter-urging-the-department-of-education-to-rescind-its-indefensible-title-ix-rule
Categories
Campus Department of Education Office for Civil Rights Scholarships

PR: Growing Number of Schools Being Investigated for Title IX Violations of Sex-Specific Scholarships

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Growing Number of Schools Being Investigated for Title IX Violations of Sex-Specific Scholarships

WASHINGTON / July 14, 2020 – Title IX administrators are placing their institutions at risk of a burdensome OCR investigation as colleges continue to violate federal requirements banning scholarships that discriminate on the basis of sex. Title IX’s regulation 34 CFR 106.37(a) prohibits schools from offering scholarships that, “On the basis of sex, provide different amounts or types of such assistance, limit eligibility for such assistance which is of any particular type or source, apply different criteria, or otherwise discriminate.” (1)

On March 16, 2020, the SAVE Title IX Equity Project issued a press release identifying 237 schools that offered sex-scholarships that discriminate against male students (2). In response to complaints filed with the Office for Civil Rights, 84 new investigations were opened, with additional complaints still under consideration by the federal agency (3).

In the month of June, OCR opened investigations for single-sex scholarship violations against the following schools:

  • Auburn University, AL
  • University of Central Arkansas
  • Colorado State University-Fort Collins
  • University of Hawaii System
  • Boise State University
  • College of Western Idaho
  • Ivy Tech Community College, IN
  • Fort Hays State University, KS
  • University of Kansas-Lawrence
  • University of Louisville, KY
  • Montgomery College, MD
  • Community College of Baltimore County
  • University of Missouri-Columbia
  • University of Missouri-Kansas City
  • University of Missouri-St. Louis
  • Montana State University-Great Falls College
  • University of Montana-Missoula
  • East Carolina University, NC
  • Central Community College, NE
  • Metropolitan Community College, NE
  • Southeast Community College, NE
  • University of Nebraska-Omaha
  • New Hampshire Technical Institute-Concord’s Community College
  • Truckee Meadows Community College, NV
  • Kent State University, OH
  • Chemeketa Community College, OR
  • University of Memphis
  • University of Tennessee
  • Brigham Young University-Provo, UT
  • Weber State University, UT
  • Virginia Commonwealth University
  • Bellevue College, WA
  • University of Washington-Seattle
  • Washington State University
  • Madison Area Technical College, WI
  • Central Wyoming College

Two of the investigations involve allegations of particularly egregious misconduct. The University of Missouri-Columbia offers 70 scholarships to female students and only 1 scholarship to male students. Similarly, Auburn University in Alabama offers 67 scholarships to females and only 1 scholarship to male students (4).

Tulane University, an institution with not only a history of being investigated by OCR for sexual discrimination but also a history of offering female only scholarships (5), has again found itself under OCR’s microscope. Although Tulane entered into a Resolution Agreement with OCR in 2019 (6), OCR is currently evaluating yet another complaint filed in April against the institution for allegedly violating federal requirements that bar sex-discriminatory scholarships.

Mark Perry, an economist at University of Michigan-Flint who himself files OCR complaints against schools with single-sex campus programs, recently opined, “Universities are for the first time being challenged for violating Title IX by offering single sex programs/scholarships, as they continue to live in the past, as if we’re still in the 1960s or 1970s, by pretending that women are handicapped and disadvantaged.” (7)

These findings highlight how university administrators and general counsel need to exercise greater oversight to correct discriminatory practices or risk a costly investigation by the federal Office for Civil Rights.

Citations:

  1. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/reg/ocr/edlite-34cfr106.html#S8
  2. http://www.saveservices.org/2020/03/pr-the-85-worst-universities-in-the-nation-offering-scholarships-that-discriminate-on-the-basis-of-sex/
  3. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/open-investigations/tix.html
  4. http://www.saveservices.org/equity/ocr-investigations/
  5. https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/tulane-university-accused-of-anti-male-title-ix-violation/
  6. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/more/06182230-b.pdf
  7. https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/05/06/a_building_backlash_to_women-only_preferences_123481.html
Categories
Campus Office for Civil Rights Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

PR: SAVE Files Amicus Brief Against 18 Attorneys’ General, In Support of New Title IX Regulation

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

 SAVE Files Amicus Brief Against 18 Attorneys’ General, In Support of New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / July 10, 2020 – SAVE filed an Amicus Brief yesterday in support of the recently released Title IX regulation, which seeks to restore fairness and due process in campus sexual harassment cases. The Amicus Brief highlights the legal inadequacies of the attorneys’ general Complaint, and urges that the Court dismiss their request for a preliminary injunction.

In 2011 the Department of Education issued a “Dear Colleague Letter” that imposed a range of new campus adjudication procedures for sexual assault cases. These changes removed a number of due process protections, such as the right of parties to be represented by counsel. As a result, hundreds of lawsuits were filed against colleges (1).  Amidst intense public pressure, the Department of Education revoked its notorious Dear Colleague Letter in 2017, and later issued a new regulation on May 6, 2020. (2)

One month later, the attorneys’ general from 18 states filed a lawsuit seeking to block the long-awaited regulation. The lawsuit claimed the new regulation will “reverse decades of effort to end the corrosive effects of sexual harassment on equal access to education.” (3)

In response, the SAVE Brief highlights that Title IX “is not limited to the protection of one sex or gender; it protects all.” (page 9) This contrasts with the assertion by the California Women’s Law Center Amicus that states Title IX only serves to protect “women and girls.” (page 8).

The SAVE Brief enumerates the types of sex-based discrimination against male students: Biased educational materials; inconsistent enforcement of policies for male and female students; and a double-standard for intoxication policies. (pages 10-16).

The Brief also provides examples of universities that refused to investigate allegations by male students claiming to be victims of female-perpetrated sexual assault. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, each year 1.7 million men are sexually “made to penetrate,” compared to 1.5 million women who are raped (4).

Noting the hundreds of lawsuits filed against colleges, the SAVE Brief reaches a resounding conclusion:

“This demonstrates a simple truth: male students constitute the overwhelming majority of victims of proceedings on campus that are unlawful and constitute discrimination on the basis of sex, in violation of Title IX. Plaintiffs totally ignore this truth in their Complaint and subsequent Motion for Preliminary Injunction. This is especially astounding given that the deprivation of students’ rights in the disciplinary process,…was a substantial predicate for the issuance of the Regulation.” (pages 9-10)

The SAVE Amicus Brief is available online (5).

Links:

  1. https://www.educationdive.com/news/title-ix-lawsuits-have-skyrocketed-in-recent-years-analysis-shows/569881/
  2. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/newsroom.html
  3. https://agportal-s3bucket.s3.amazonaws.com/uploadedfiles/Another/News/Press_Releases/TitleIX_Complaint.pdf
  4. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf Tables 3.1 and 3.5.
  5. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Amicus-Brief-Attorneys-General-7.9.2020.pdf
Categories
Sexual Assault

Men’s Lives Matter: Male Victims of Sexual Abuse

When a woman sexually abuses a man, the pain inflicted is dismissed by those whose political paradigm does not include men as victims. Unfortunately, these voices dominate the research, media, and legislation that surrounds the issue of sexual victimization.

Their narrative: “Women are victims, men are perpetrators.” This rigid approach even ignores the glaring male-on-male sexual violence in prisons because it does not fit the mold; in fact, if prisoners were counted, then men might well show a greater rate of rape than women. The blindness to male victimization inflicts a second injustice on every male survivor who is either viewed as a liar or as unimportant. Female survivors of rape in the ‘50s were treated in much the same way by law enforcement and the court system.

The situation with the sexual abuse of men is slowly changing. A few years ago, the CDC added a category of sexual abuse called “made to penetrate,” which is an important but almost entirely overlooked form of sexual abuse, perhaps because it applies only to males. A report entitled “The Sexual Victimization of Men in America: New Data Challenge Old Assumptions” was published in a 2014 issue of the American Journal of Public Health. There, UCLA researchers Lara Stemple and Ilan Meyer explain, “By introducing the term, ‘made to penetrate,’ the CDC has added new detail to help understand what happens when men are sexually victimized…Therefore, to the extent that males experience nonconsensual sex differently (i.e., being made to penetrate), male victimization will remain vastly undercounted in federal data collection on violent crime.” Stemple and Meyer conclude, “we first argue that it is time to move past the male perpetrator and female victim paradigm [of rape]. Overreliance on it stigmatizes men who are victimized.”

Including the category ‘made to penetrate’ could shift the entire paradigm of sexual violence. The CDC, National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010-2012 State Report, released in 2017, indicates (Tables 3.1 and 3.5):

Males:

  • Made to penetrate: 1.7 million
  • Rape: Numbers too small to report a reliable estimate
  • Sexual coercion: 1.6 million
  • Unwanted sexual contact: 1.9 million

Females:

  • Rape: 1.5 million
  • Made to penetrate: Numbers too small to report a reliable estimate
  • Sexual coercion: 2.4 million
  • Unwanted sexual contact: 2.5 million

With this shift of paradigm, female-on-male violence may start to receive attention. The problem is enormous. BOJ statistics for 2018 show the imprisonment rate in America as 431 sentenced per 100,000 residents. Extrapolating from the figures for federal prison, well over 90% of prisoners are male. In its report “No Escape: Male Rape in U.S. Prisons,” Human Rights Watch indicates that approximately 20% of male prisoners are sexually victimized. Most sexual violence professionals, however, seem indifferent to the situation.

The rate of male sexual victims is likely understated because men notoriously underreport their abuse. The National Domestic Violence Abuse Hotline offers several reasons why. They are socialized against appearing “weak”; their abuse becomes the brunt of jokes; they believe there is no support out there for them…and with reason. The Maryland nonprofit Stop Abusive and Violence Environments summarized the situation. “On the one hand, about 25% of men who sought help from DV hotlines were connected with resources that were helpful. On the other hand, nearly 67%…reported that these DV agencies and hotline were not at all helpful. Many reported being turned away.” Their research tells “a story of male helpseekers who are often doubted, ridiculed, and given false information. This…impacts men’s physical and mental health.”

How can this happen in a society preoccupied with sexual abuse? The dominant narrative of sexual violence is identity politics. This claims that a person’s identity is not defined by a common humanity and the choices he or she makes as an individual. It is defined by the specific subcategories of humanity into which a person fits; gender and race are examples. Instead of humanity having common interests, such as freedom of religion, the subcategories have interests that clash. Men benefit at the expense of women. They do so by sexually oppressing women…or so the story goes.

The preceding statement reflects some historical truth. In the ‘50s, men as a class did receive preferential treatment in the workplace, academia, and from the general culture. Women who experienced sexual and domestic violence were blamed for their own victimization. But society has changed at a dizzying pace. We live in a healthier society that contains a fatal flaw: identity politics. If people are defined by biological subcategories that are in conflict, then society is at war—a forever war. Fairness or equality to one class means pulling down another. If men perpetrate sexual violence, then raising up women means policing and punishing males. When facts contradict the narrative, they may be given a cursory nod, then the narrators return to the script.

In the ‘60s, the unjust treatment of female rape victims sparked a sexual revolution that ripped open the culture. But no revolution defends male victims. Instead, the ‘60s revolution has been institutionalized within academia, bureaucracy, and law. It has calcified. The established sexual order now depends on ignoring male victims or dismissing them as inconvenient. It must ignore the fact that violence has no gender. Violence only has individuals who abuse and individuals who are abused. Excluding women or men from either category shows a willful blindness to reality. It expresses political self-interest, not justice.

Source: https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/mens-lives-matter-male-victims-of-sexual-abuse/

Categories
Uncategorized

Black students four times as likely to allege rights violations in Title IX proceedings

Jonathan Taylor, Founder

Title IX for all

Among plaintiffs whose races are known and when adjusted for student population, black students are four times as likely as white students to file lawsuits alleging their rights were violated in higher ed Title IX disciplinary proceedings. This data, sourced from lawsuits in our Title IX Legal Database, is based on Title IX For All’s recent research analyzing plaintiff demographic data from the ~650 lawsuits filed against higher-ed institutions since 2011.

This data confirms what many have long suspected: that students of color are significantly more likely to be impacted by higher ed Title IX proceedings. While a sizable portion of plaintiffs are of unknown race, we see no reason to suspect this would disconfirm the basic issue of proportionality.

Please see this attachment for a PDF of the race/sex breakdown of plaintiffs in lawsuits by accused students based on our analysis. The data reveals that when the race of the plaintiff is known, white and black students file lawsuits in fairly even numbers overall. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, however, white students outnumber black students four to one. If they file lawsuits in even numbers, this means that black students are four times as likely as white students to file a lawsuit when adjusted for student population.

These findings come at a time when public officials who have long regarded themselves as champions of civil rights for minorities suspected or accused of crimes advocate a heightened awareness of their rights while simultaneously working to undermine their rights in higher ed settings.

As always, Title IX For All advocates that the rights to due process and freedom from discrimination are fundamental rights for all people and do not stop at the campus property line. Public officials should be consistent with their values and acknowledge that these rights are not in conflict with one another; on the contrary, they are part of the same mission of equal rights for all.

Categories
Uncategorized

In college I was falsely accused of sexual harassment. Men like me deserve due process.

Categories
Campus Free Speech Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX Title IX Equity Project

PR: Universities and Colleges Take Steps to Implement New Title IX Regulation

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Universities and Colleges Take Steps to Implement New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / June 25, 2020 – Following lengthy public debate, the U.S. Department of Education issued a new Title IX regulation on May 6, 2020, which carries the force and effect of law. [1]

The new regulation takes effect on August 14, 2020. This means school administrators and Title IX Coordinators have only about 50 days to enact policies and revise training procedures to ensure fairness and equality for all students.

Within this time frame, schools must restore fairness on campuses by upholding students’ rights to written notice of allegations, the right to an advisor, as well as the right to submit, cross-examine, and challenge evidence at a live hearing. One of the key provisions will require colleges to post their Title IX training materials on the websites for public review.[2]

To date, the regulation has been endorsed by editorial boards of the following newspapers: Detroit News, The Oklahoman, New York Daily News, Wall Street Journal, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and Philadelphia Enquirer. [3] The Independent Women’s Forum has highlighted how the new regulation will help restore due process on campus and bring an end to the so-called “Kangaroo Courts.” [4]

SAVE has identified numerous ways that the new rule will support sexual assault complainants. [5] Most importantly, the regulation establishes a legally enforceable duty of universities to respond to such cases in a timely manner.

Schools have varied in their initial responses to the new standard.

In a letter to the University of Wisconsin System (UWS), Governor Tony Evers stated, “UWS is required to implement these changes through administrative rule making.” Evers mandated his Board of Regents to do so by submitting a scope statement to him, but rejected the first one on the grounds it was too vague. [6]

The South Dakota Board of Regents was scheduled to vote this week to implement the procedures: “Using a hearing examiner and affording full due process at the onset enhances the probability of getting to the correct outcome sooner, rather than a later, an issue that has haunted Title IX nationally in a litany of high profile court appeals in recent years.” [7]

Anecdotal reports indicate other leading universities have initiated the process of implementing the new regulation.

In contrast, a memo from University of Denver Chancellor Jeremy Haefner indicates the University is focusing on ensuring the changes in the final rule support survivors: “I am writing to ensure you that these changes will in no way compromise our commitment to creating an environment in which all members of the DU community feel safe reporting their experiences and remain confident that their cases will be heard thoroughly, fairly, and with respect.” [8] Unlike other schools, the memo does not mention fair and equitable procedures for all parties.

In October 2019, SAVE launched its Title IX Equity Project to assure compliance with Title IX requirements. As a result, the Office of Civil Rights has opened over 100 investigations to date regarding university scholarship policies that discriminate against male or female students. [9] The Title IX Equity Project has enjoyed extensive media coverage, as well. [10]

Citations:

[1] https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/newsroom.html

[2] https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-devos-takes-historic-action-strengthen-title-ix-protections-all-students

[3] http://www.saveservices.org/title-ix-regulation/

[4] https://www.iwf.org/2020/05/06/new-title-ix-regulations-restore-due-process-on-campus/

[5] http://www.saveservices.org/2020/05/analysis-new-title-ix-regulation-will-support-and-assist-complainants-in-multiple-ways/

[6]https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/WIGOV/2020/06/15/file_attachments/1474234/Evers_2020_06_15_UWS%20Ch%2017.pdf

[7] https://www.sdbor.edu/the-board/agendaitems/2014AgendaItems/2020%20Agenda%20Items/June24_20/5_B_BOR0620.pdf

[8] http://www.saveservices.org/2020/06/university-of-denver-chancellor-memo-regarding-title-ix-compliance/

[9] http://www.saveservices.org/equity/ocr-investigations/

[10] http://www.saveservices.org/equity/

Categories
Domestic Violence Uncategorized Violence Against Women Act

Coronavirus-Abuse Hoax Unravels Across the Globe

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@EndToDV.org

Coronavirus-Abuse Hoax Unravels Across the Globe

WASHINGTON / June 11, 2020 – The Coalition to End Domestic Violence today reports that the oft-repeated claim that coronavirus stay-at-home policies are causing a global “surge” or “spike” in domestic violence has been refuted by police reports gathered from countries around the world.

On April 5, United Nations chief Antonio Guterres issued a Tweet declaring, “Many women under lockdown for #COVID19 face violence where they should be safest: in their own homes….I urge all governments to put women’s safety first as they respond to the pandemic.” (1) The following day, UN Women director Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka issued a statement warning, “We see a shadow pandemic growing, of violence against women.” (2)

But police reports received from 10 countries across the globe, listed below in alphabetical order, reach a different conclusion:

  1. Albania: In March 2020, the number of domestic violence reports decreased by 141, as compared to the same month in the previous year (3). Likewise, Judge Durim Hasa reported a decrease in domestic violence cases in his district (4).
  2. Australia: In New South Wales, domestic violence assaults decreased from 2,434 in April, 2019 to 2,145 in April, 2020, representing a 12% drop. Bureau executive director Jackie Fitzgerald said there was no evidence that social isolation measures have led to an increase in domestic violence (5). In Queensland, “Reports of domestic violence breaches dropped 5.6% between March 6 and 27, while court applications related to such matters fell 20% in that time.” (6)
  3. Austria: The incidence of domestic violence has not risen, and many places have seen a reduction, according to reports from dozens of police departments across the country (7).
  4. Canada: The Ottawa Police Service reported that calls requesting an officer’s intervention in domestic disputes were down more than 23% from March 16 to April 30, compared to the same period in 2019. (8) In Toronto, police report a “small drop” in domestic violence numbers since social distancing measures went into effect (9). Police in Vancouver have not seen any increase in domestic violence statistics (10).
  5. India: Earlier this week, Smriti Irani, Minister for Women and Child Development, was asked whether the lockdown has increased domestic violence against women. Her response, “It is false.” (11)
  6. Netherlands: A March newspaper account reported the National Police noted a 12% domestic violence decline, compared to the same week in 2019. (12)
  7. Russia: The number of domestic violence crimes fell by 13% during the lockdown, compared to the same month in 2019. (13)
  8. Spain: During the first two weeks of April, “there has been a sharp drop in complaints being made to the police.” (14)
  9. Tasmania: According to police Acting Commander Stuart Wilkinson, “we’re not seeing an increase at all.” (15)
  10. United States: Among reports gathered from 33 police departments across the country, 11 noted a decline and 19 saw steady numbers of domestic violence cases. Only three offices indicated an increase of 10% or more in domestic violence cases (16).

Many countries have reported increases in calls to domestic violence hotlines. But commentator Wendy McElroy explains why police reports are more accurate than hotlines in tracking trends: “People access [domestic violence] hotlines and services for help on many non-DV issues, including housing, immigration, and medical problems, but they report crime to the police. The same person may phone a hotline many times, but a police report is almost always ‘one person, one case’. The funding of a DV service often depends on its volume, which encourages overstatement. Police accounts also ground DV in reality, with real names and verifiable details rather than anonymous reports.” (17)

While it is possible that domestic violence has increased in some areas, the United Nations’ startling prediction of a new “pandemic” of violence against women around the world has been shown to be false. And extensive global research shows men and women engage in domestic violence at equal rates (18).

In India, Smriti Irani expressed dismay over the domestic violence “scaremongering” at the hands of certain non-governmental organizations (11). In Austria, one group charged feminist-oriented domestic violence groups with using the coronavirus issue to make “untrue statements,” thereby ignoring male victims of violence (7). In Australia, Corrine Barraclough noted, “The myth that domestic violence is surging in lockdown will become one of the biggest lies the gendered narrative leans on for additional funding.” (19)

Links:

  1. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/04/1061052
  2. https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2020/4/statement-ed-phumzile-violence-against-women-during-pandemic
  3. https://albania.unwomen.org/en/news-and-events/stories/2020/04/unpacking-the-impact-of-covid-19-on-women-and-girls-in-albania
  4. https://exit.al/en/2020/04/14/albanian-judge-claims-coronavirus-has-led-to-decrease-in-domestic-violence/
  5. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/nsw-domestic-violence-down-12-amid-virus/news-story/2694583a900379242f4510691f66e410
  6. https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/health-wellbeing/coronavirus-australia-queensland-police-concerned-about-fewer-domestic-violence-complaints-c-951819
  7. http://www.vaeter-ohne-rechte.at/frauenorganisationen-fuerchten-um-geld/ (Click on top tab to view English translation)
  8. https://globalnews.ca/news/6911856/ottawa-domestic-abuse-calls-coronavirus-pandemic/
  9. https://toronto.citynews.ca/2020/04/08/domestic-violence-calls-surge-during-coronavirus-pandemic/
  10. https://globalnews.ca/news/6789403/domestic-violence-coronavirus/
  11. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/union-minister-smiriti-irani-debunks-claims-of-lockdown-leading-to-increase-in-domestic-violence/articleshow/76256622.cms?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=TOIMobile
  12. https://www.bnnvara.nl/zembla/artikelen/meer-hulpvragen-huiselijk-geweld-via-online-chatdiensten
  13. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/05/russia-domestic-violence-cases-more-than-double-under-lockdown
  14. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/apr/28/three-women-killed-in-spain-as-coronavirus-lockdown-sees-rise-in-domestic-violence
  15. https://www.theadvocate.com.au/story/6718508/no-spike-in-domestic-violence-most-coasters-following-isolation-rules-police/?src=rss
  16. http://endtodv.org/pr/anatomy-of-a-hoax-the-great-coronavirus-abuse-myth-of-2020/
  17. https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/do-activists-want-domestic-violence-to-increase-during-the-pandemic/
  18. http://www.saveservices.org/dvlp/policy-briefings/partner-abuse-worldwide/
  19. https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=corrine%20barraclough&epa=SEARCH_BOX
Categories
Title IX

Evers blocks UW from complying with Trump sex assault rules

https://www.startribune.com/evers-blocks-uw-from-complying-with-trump-sex-assault-rules/571273442/

Evers blocks UW from complying with Trump sex assault rules

By TODD RICHMOND Associated Press

JUNE 15, 2020 — 4:45PM

MADISON, Wis. — Gov. Tony Evers blocked University of Wisconsin System officials Monday from taking the first steps toward complying with new federal rules that bolster the rights of sexual misconduct defendants and narrow the range of cases colleges are required to investigate.

Evers wrote in a letter to UW System President Ray Cross that he was rejecting the system’s outline for a rule complying with changes the Trump administration made last month to Title IX regulations. Evers said the outline doesn’t clearly state whether the system will weaken or strengthen the definition of sexual harassment. The outline also doesn’t recognize the economic impact of providing more mental health services to victims frozen out of the complaint process, the governor said.

“Education and civil rights leaders across the nation have voiced strong concerns about the new federal regulations and the chilling effect they will have on survivors of sexual harassment and sexual assault,” Evers wrote.

UW System spokesman Mark Pitsch had no immediate comment.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new rules last month tweaking Title IX, a 1972 law barring discrimination based on sex in education. The changes narrow the definition of sexual harassment and require colleges to investigate claims only if the misconduct is so severe and offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to education.

Obama administration guidelines, by contrast, defined sexual harassment as an unwelcome sexual advance. The final policy was quickly condemned by opponents who say it weakens protections for victims and will discourage many from reporting misconduct.

DeVos’ revisions also state schools can be held accountable for mishandling complaints only if they acted with deliberate indifference and allow student to question one another through representatives during live hearings.

The changes take effect Aug. 14. Evers earlier this month authorized Attorney General Josh Kaul to join a 17-state lawsuit alleging DeVos’ changes undercut Title IX’s mandate to eradicate sexual discrimination in federally funded education programs.

UW System President Ray Cross submitted a scope statement to Evers on May 21 regardless, noting in the statement that refusing to comply could lead to federal enforcement action and lawsuits.

 

 

By TODD RICHMOND Associated Press

JUNE 15, 2020 — 4:45PM

MADISON, Wis. — Gov. Tony Evers blocked University of Wisconsin System officials Monday from taking the first steps toward complying with new federal rules that bolster the rights of sexual misconduct defendants and narrow the range of cases colleges are required to investigate.

Evers wrote in a letter to UW System President Ray Cross that he was rejecting the system’s outline for a rule complying with changes the Trump administration made last month to Title IX regulations. Evers said the outline doesn’t clearly state whether the system will weaken or strengthen the definition of sexual harassment. The outline also doesn’t recognize the economic impact of providing more mental health services to victims frozen out of the complaint process, the governor said.

“Education and civil rights leaders across the nation have voiced strong concerns about the new federal regulations and the chilling effect they will have on survivors of sexual harassment and sexual assault,” Evers wrote.

UW System spokesman Mark Pitsch had no immediate comment.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new rules last month tweaking Title IX, a 1972 law barring discrimination based on sex in education. The changes narrow the definition of sexual harassment and require colleges to investigate claims only if the misconduct is so severe and offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to education.

Obama administration guidelines, by contrast, defined sexual harassment as an unwelcome sexual advance. The final policy was quickly condemned by opponents who say it weakens protections for victims and will discourage many from reporting misconduct.

DeVos’ revisions also state schools can be held accountable for mishandling complaints only if they acted with deliberate indifference and allow student to question one another through representatives during live hearings.

The changes take effect Aug. 14. Evers earlier this month authorized Attorney General Josh Kaul to join a 17-state lawsuit alleging DeVos’ changes undercut Title IX’s mandate to eradicate sexual discrimination in federally funded education programs.

UW System President Ray Cross submitted a scope statement to Evers on May 21 regardless, noting in the statement that refusing to comply could lead to federal enforcement action and lawsuits.