Categories
Title IX

Release The New Title IX Regs, Madam Secretary

This is collateral damage that Democrats — who have spent the last few years championing the #MeToo movement — should be loath to incur. Democrats who subject Ms. Reade’s allegations to a level of scrutiny not widely applied to accusers in similar circumstances — such as Christine Blasey-Ford, who famously came forward during the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court to allege that he had sexually accosted her in high school — also open up past and future cases to reproachful disregard. Conservatives, like my colleague Bret Stephens, can see the plain gulf between how Democrats have approached sexual assault in politically advantageous cases versus Ms. Reade’s, and the evident hypocrisy threatens to discredit the entire enterprise.

Whether Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade or not, a fact that will never be determined because Reade chose not to avail herself of the mechanism America uses to make such determinations, the Democrats, the pseudo-feminists and most importantly, Joseph Biden know a far harder truth: They are hypocrites. They are and were wrong. There must be due process for the accused.

KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor did the math.

If this long overdue change is sincere, the Democrats can show it by supporting the pending new Title IX regulations. The new rules are designed to require campuses to treat students accused of sexual misconduct with fairness and impartiality instead of effectively presuming guilt, as too many campuses currently do. Now is the ideal time for the Trump administration to release those regulations, spearheaded by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

It’s been a terrible struggle over the past decade for male college students to eke out what little opportunity they could to defend themselves against accusations wrapped in a litany of inane excuses that made everything, no matter what, proof of guilt. When the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter and its progeny were rescinded, activists cried that giving the accused a tenth of a chance to defend themselves was enabling rapists.

Can the same people who gave us whiplash in their pivot from Believe All Women to Take Women Seriously But Vigorously Investigate live with their flagrant hypocrisy by persisting in their disingenuous complaints about the new Title IX regs? As KC and Stuart note, “if this long overdue change is sincere,” they cannot. It’s a huge “if.”

But the head cheerleader, and the presidential nominee who has taken the hard position against giving male college students due process, is none other than the man who asks it for himself now. Is joe Biden “sincere”? Does Joe Biden have the integrity to admit he’s been dangerously wrong up to now, but he’s seen the light?

FACE, families Advocating for Campus Equality, sent Biden a letter putting the question to him.

We are hopeful your recent experience has made you realize that “sexual misconduct” is no longer just about sex. The “rules of engagement” for sexual misconduct are a moving target. Historically-acceptable hugs and genuine forms of non-sexual expressions of affection are no longer acceptable. Worse still, the consequences can be a swift end to education, career, and sometimes can even be life-ending. This affects not only those wrongfully disciplined, but also their mothers, fathers, siblings, grandparents, and spouses.

Children and young adults are not puppets to manipulate as props for the purpose of advancing political agendas. Yet that is today’s reality. Just like you have been accused of touching women in ways that cause them to “feel uncomfortable,” so too have many men, women, and LGBTQ students and professors been disciplined for the often subjective feelings of their accusers.

As a well-respected public figure, you are fortunate to have the opportunity to survive accusations of impropriety for your well-intended gestures, as well as an audience willing to forgive. Unfortunately, young students and faculty members only experience draconian repercussions for the same types of behaviors.

Joe Biden enjoys the support of his followers, his party and most of the media, who will do their part to seek out faults in Tara Reade’s accusations and history, ignoring the litany of excuses that have protected other accusers, from Christine Blasey-Ford to every woman on campus to every accuser on social media. And still Biden is constrained to defend against the accusations. What of the college sophomore, the 19-year-old male student who has neither the powerful friends and supporters nor the ability to air his denial on Morning Joe? If Biden demands his chance to deny guilt, would he demand the 19-year-old male student be presumed guilty?

Senator Biden, please, take off your political hat for just a moment, and open your eyes to what’s happening to innocent students and faculty who could be your sons, daughters, brothers or sisters – because, as you must now know, “doing the right thing” no longer protects you in this ‘accusation = guilt’ world.

Whether Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade will forever be a mystery, but in a principled world, he would be presumed innocent because the burden is, must be, on the accuser to prove his guilt. The same thing is true of male college students accused of sexual misconduct, and it’s time for Biden to man up to the egregiously wrong position he’s taken for too long and concede that every accused must be afforded due process. Just like him.

Now is the moment, the “perfect storm,” to release the new Title IX regs that will, hopefully, give male college students a fighting chance to defend themselves from accusations. It may still be that neither Biden, nor his supporters, are sincere in their epiphany that due process matters, and their hypocrisy will then be as flagrant as possible. It will be out there for all to see.

But there will never be a better moment than now. Secretary DeVos, please release the new regs now.

Categories
Domestic Violence Violence Against Women Act

Open Letter to Sen. Joni Ernst Regarding Her VAWA-Coronavirus Letter

Dear Senator Ernst:

I recently donated $50 toward your re-election campaign, so I was especially disappointed that you co-signed the letter demanding that coronavirus bills provide funding for Violence Against Women Act programs: https://www.ernst.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/e899e13a-b415-45b9-a099-bb36394d7a52/76B673E37BDB48B336800CA110FDC429.final-letter-on-domestic-violence-programs-at-doj.pdf

 

VAWA is a biased and unproductive program that Joe Biden pushed through while specifically excluding testimony from researchers. After all, the scientific research has consistently found for over 40 years that women initiate domestic violence as often as men — https://web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm — (and that children are as harmed watching mom hit dad as they are watching dad hit mom)! Senator Ernst, I am referring to thousands of scientific studies!

 

On the other hand, the statistics being bandied about to push this windfall to the domestic violence industry (much of whose corruption and ineffectiveness has been revealed in government audits) are not based on scientific research.

 

The dirty little secret of the domestic violence industry is that domestic violence within lesbian couples is as high as within heterosexual couples. But, for financial gain and because there is no man to blame, this research is not very well known. Indeed, one woman came to me for help because her female abuser was a high official in her local shelter.

 

This industry is exploiting the coronavirus for another windfall by cherry-picking areas where domestic violence is increasing (while omitting the greater number of jurisdictions where the level has either decreased or remained the same. By “another windfall” I am referring to their practice of piggybacking on events and conning well-intentioned agencies and corporations out of millions of dollars — for example their hoax about Super Bowl Sunday being the most dangerous day for American women, a hoax that was exposed by the Washington Post only after they had shaken down the NFL for millions of dollars.

 

Please, see some alternative sources of information such as:

http://endtodv.org/pr/hoax-alarming-claims-of-domestic-violence-spike-cannot-be-verified/ and

http://endtodv.org/pr/tone-deaf-senators-urge-413-million-for-partner-abuse-programs-imperiling-prompt-passage-of-coronavirus-bill/

 

Sincerely,

Fredric Hayward

Categories
Action Alert Campus Due Process

Release the Regs! Release the Regs!

The civil rights of K-12 students, and university students and faculty, continue to be trampled on as each day passes. It is past time for the Department of Education to publish the new Title IX regulations, because “Justice delayed is justice denied.” [1]

We need your help.

Apparently Secretary DeVos and her team are pushing to get the regulations published, but there is a difference of opinion at the White House, as to whether to publish the regulations during the COVID-19 crisis.

SAVE and other due process advocacy groups [2] say now is the best time to publish the regulations because the campuses are quiet and empty of students. The administrators have the time and capacity to put implementation plans in place before the fall semester begins.

Most importantly, students and faculty deserve the right to have fair and equitable procedures when accused of a sexual misconduct issue. This includes presumption of innocence, timely and adequate written notice, and a meaningful hearing process.

No more Kangaroo Courts! Release the Regs!

Please email the White House today at https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ and tell them to let the Department of Education release the Title IX regulations. When students walk onto campuses in the fall, they should be taking their civil rights with them, not leaving them at home.

[1]https://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/16/betsy-devos-civil-rights-office-240610

[2]https://www.thecollegefix.com/times-up-to-restore-due-process-groups-urge-devos-to-ignore-coronavirus-stalling-tactics-for-title-ix-reform/

Categories
Title IX

Callisto Campus, tool for documenting sexual assault at colleges, discontinued

Callisto reverses decision to delete account data following user concerns

 

By  

Callisto Campus, a tool available for Stanford students to document and report sexual and relationship violence, will be discontinued on June 30 and replaced with another version of the program.

Callisto is a third-party online platform that allows students to document and time stamp experiences with unwanted sexual conduct. If a student is not ready to submit a report to the University, their report is saved in the system, with the option for it to be submitted later.

“One of the unique features about Callisto was the ability to have your report be submitted to the Title IX office in the event that the perpetrator that you had listed also matched the perpetrator another survivor listed,” wrote former ASSU President Shanta Katipamula ’19 M.S. ’20 in an email to The Daily. While chair of the Undergraduate Senate, Katipamula also authored the bill proposing the three-year pilot of Callisto in 2016.

While Callisto Campus will be discontinued, this year Callisto will launch a new product that connects victims of sexual misconduct to attorneys who help them understand actions they can take, according to the Callisto website. Stanford students will have free access to this platform, but the University is still deciding whether to initiate a new partnership with Callisto, according to ASSU Co-Director of Sexual Violence Prevention Krithika Iyer ’21.

“We are investigating what a potential partnership would entail, and whether a new Stanford-Callisto partnership would be beneficial for survivors,” Iyer wrote. “We will be seeking input from the student community.”
“Callisto is transitioning some of its services over the summer and it will no longer be based on a partnership model with individual schools,” wrote Senior Associate Vice Provost for Institutional Equity and Access Lauren Schoenthaler in a statement to The Daily.

An update on the Callisto Campus website initially read that the service would be replaced with a new version of Callisto and that all account data would be deleted, quickly leading some to raise concerns.

“This would undermine the ability of the platform to identify repeat perpetrators on campus,” Iyer wrote.
Stanford Law professor Michele Dauber was one of the individuals who reached out to Callisto to share her concerns. One of her concerns was Callisto’s inability to inform users that their data would be deleted.

“Because there are no records kept of who the users are, Callisto doesn’t stay in contact with their end-users,” Dauber said. “In other words, if you were someone who had made such a report, you wouldn’t get an email from Callisto saying, ‘we’re changing our business model.’”

She spoke to the trauma that this could create for survivors who had placed their trust in the platform.

“They had trusted this entity because it was created by survivors and then found that all of their information had been deleted when they didn’t know it,” she said.

Callisto has since reversed its decision to delete the data.

“With respect to the feedback we have received from our partners and the extraordinary challenges posed by COVID-19, we are not deleting this data,” wrote interim Callisto CEO Tina Robilotto in an email to The Daily. “We will maintain the record data even after Callisto Campus is decommissioned and the new product is launched to our partner campuses.”

“While I understand that they’ve now understood the error of this decision and are no longer going to be deleting records, the initial decision to do so was poorly communicated and breached the trust survivors had placed in their system,” wrote Katipamula.

Dauber complimented Callisto’s “willingness to admit a mistake and reverse it.”

Schoenthaler said that Callisto had informed the University on Thursday morning that it no longer had plans to delete the records, calling it “great news.”

Dauber urged students to download reports they had made to Callisto to ensure they are preserved, and Iyer made a similar recommendation.

“While Callisto has committed to not deleting any records, the ASSU recommends that students download their report if they want to be absolutely sure that they retain a permanent copy,” Iyer said.

Despite Callisto Campus’s unique function, Iyer told The Daily that the platform has not been sufficiently advertised to students and that she hopes to increase awareness about it in following years.

“Data from the AAU survey indicate that only 9% of Stanford students are aware that Callisto Campus is an available resource,” she said. Iyer also reported efforts to ensure that Callisto is included in New Student Orientation information sessions next fall.

Dauber called the episode a “cautionary tale” about Silicon Valley’s tendency to rely on technology to solve problems.

“I think Callisto came from the best of intentions but also was riding that wave of easy assumptions about technical fixes for a very hard social problem,” she said. “There is no shortcut, in my opinion, to fixing the problem of campus sexual assault.”

This article has been updated to include a clarification from Iyer on the tool to be included in New Student Orientation information sessions.

Contact Esha Dhawan at edhawan ‘at’ stanford.edu. 

Categories
Title IX

COVID-19 Must Not Delay Enactment of New Title IX Regulations

COVID-19 Must Not Delay Enactment of New Title IX Regulations
U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos (Credit: Gage Skidmore)

COVID-19 Must Not Delay Enactment of New Title IX Regulations

Sixteen months ago, the Department of Education proposed Title IX regulations that take seriously the rights of both victims and the accused in campus sexual misconduct proceedings.

Since then, the department has reviewed more than 100,000 public comments on those regulations, incorporating feedback from diverse stakeholders.

Despite this opportunity for robust public comment, opponents of these regulations have made clear from day one that they will do everything they can to ensure they are never enacted — including, recently, sending four letters asking the department to defer the rulemaking until after the COVID-19 crisis has passed.

The department must not give in to these opportunistic and disingenuous efforts to thwart regulations that would bring desperately needed balance to campus sexual misconduct adjudications.

Campus sexual misconduct proceedings have been seriously out of balance since the department issued a Title IX “Dear Colleague” letter that transformed the way universities adjudicated sexual misconduct cases.

The letter eviscerated due-process protections for accused students and kicked off an era of aggressive Title IX enforcement that led many universities to hold proceedings rigged against the accused in order to appear serious about combating sexual assault.

As soon as Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos announced in September 2017 that the department was withdrawing the 2011 Dear Colleague letter in favor of a more balanced approach to Title IX rulemaking, supporters of the previous guidance made clear that they would do everything in their power to stop the new rules.

When the department issued interim guidance, the new guidance was immediately challenged in court by a coalition of organizations — including three of the groups now calling on the department to suspend Title IX rulemaking due to COVID-19.

After the department issued its proposed Title IX regulations in November 2018, it opened a notice-and-comment period during which it received an unprecedented number of public comments.

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro immediately threatened legal action to block the rules’ implementation and organized a coalition of state attorneys general who wrote to the department objecting to the regulations.

Many of these attorneys general, Shapiro included, also signed on to one of the letters now citing COVID-19 as the reason the regulations should not go into effect.

In November 2019, the regulations moved to the final step before enactment: review by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget. OMB review is not intended to be a second notice-and-comment period, but rather a final opportunity to raise concerns that may have been overlooked.

Immediately, opponents of the rule — despite already having participated in the notice-and-comment process — began scheduling OMB meetings out as far as possible, in what appears to be another effort to delay adoption of the regulations.

The final two meetings scheduled were by the Women’s Law Project and Equal Rights Advocates, both signatories on one of the COVID-19 letters.

Many of the groups now asking the department to suspend rulemaking are associations of college administrators.

These same administrators have also been publicly touting the need, and their ability, to continue with Title IX adjudications during the crisis by using videoconferencing and other technology.

If administrators can use these technologies to conduct investigations and hearings, they can certainly use the same technologies — not to mention the additional time on their hands — to prepare to make changes to their policies under regulations about which they have known for the past 16 months.

These recent efforts to capitalize on the pandemic should be seen for what they are — the last in a long and consistent line of efforts to ultimately delay the regulations’ adoption until the next election in the hope that they will never take effect.

Accused students have waited long enough for even a modicum of basic fairness. The new rules must be enacted now.

Publication of the regulations does not mean that they must be implemented instantaneously: there is always a grace period for schools to come into compliance, a period that could theoretically be extended, if necessary, in the face of exigent circumstances.

Universities have been on notice of these proposed changes for 16 months now.

If they have failed to plan and are not ready to provide these basic procedural protections, they have only themselves to blame.

Categories
Due Process Sexual Assault Title IX

Reform Title IX Now

The Department of Education’s (DOE) reform of Title IX—the law that bans discrimination based on sex at federally-funded schools—has been a long time coming. For three Senators, it has not been long enough. They strenuously object to the impact on how colleges handle accusations of sexual misconduct. No longer will an accused be presumed guilty until proven innocent. Instead, he will be accorded due process.

On March 31, Patty Murray—the leading Democrat on the Senate education committee—Elizabeth Warren, and Kirsten Gillibrand sent a letter to Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to express their opposition to finalizing the reform. “We urge you not to release the final Title IX rule at this time,” they argued, “and instead to focus on helping schools navigate the urgent issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.”

This is an odd argument. Now seems to be the perfect time for colleges to work on policy and administrative matters. Campuses are empty. No sexual misconduct hearings will be interrupted; students will be spared the confusion of a mid-semester policy change; administrators can implement regulations before the new academic year.

Colleges are hardly caught off guard. The reform began on September 22, 2017 when the DOE withdrew the controversial Dear Colleague Letter (2011) that governed the treatment of sexual misconduct accusations on campus. The Obama-era Letter was widely criticized for mandating a low standard of proof for findings of guilt and encouraging the denial of due process, such as a defendant’s right to a lawyer. The DOE’s replacement guideline was officially made public on November 29, 2018 when the Federal Register published “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance.

The proposed reform received vast attention and backlash in this time of #MeToo that demands automatic belief of women’s accusations. in January 2018, three national public interest organizations, including the highly influential National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), sued DeVos and the DOE to block the Title IX reform. The lawsuit claimed that the “new and extreme Title IX policy…was issued unlawfully and based on discriminatory beliefs about women and girls as survivors of sexual violence, in violation of the Constitution.” The lawsuit was eventually dismissed.

Senator Murray has also attacked the Title IX proposals. A news release from her office reported on Murray’s statements at a Senate hearing on campus sexual assault. “I stand with you [accusers] and I’m going to keep fighting to stop what happened to you.” Murray accused the DOE of being “callous” and ignoring “the experiences of survivors,” which would “discourage students from coming forward after being sexually assaulted.” Gillibrand has decried DeVos as favoring “predators over survivors.” Warren has stated, “There’s no greater example of how we’re failing students and teachers than Betsy DeVos, the worst Secretary of Education we’ve seen.” These statements do not argue for the delay but for the derailment of DOE’s plans.

Liberals view the new rules as a shift to the right and an abandonment of Obama-era policies. Consider two definitions of a key term, “sexual harassment.” According to the Dear Colleague Letter, “Sexual harassment is unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature. It includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature.” This broad characterization includes bad jokes and leering glances. By contrast, DeVos uses the reigning Supreme Court definition of “unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe, pervasive and objectively offensive that it denies a person access to the school’s education program or activity.” This is a far more limited definition.

Why, then, are the 3 Senators calling for delay rather than dismantlement? The coronavirus is unlikely to disappear as an issue before the 2020 election. And, if Joe Biden wins, he has promised the reform would be withdrawn. This process would be be easier, however, if policy changes were not already implemented.

Stalling the DOE reform seems to be a conscious strategy of its opponents. According to Tulane University Title IX coordinator, Meredith Smith, the NWLC orchestrated a sequence of delays with various victims rights groups. Smith stated, “So there was this delay strategy happening. We would hear that the Department of Education was about to release the regulations and then the National Women’s Law Center and all these other groups would parachute in and get more and more meetings on the calendar which push [the release date] back.” They requested a long series of meetings with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for example. During the final public commentary on a regulation, individuals can meet in person or over the phone with OMB officials to share concerns; this process usually takes a couple of days, With the DOE regulation, the first meeting was November 13, 2019, and the process ended on March 27, 2020. It stretched over 4 months.

A recent article in the National Review, entitled “Coronavirus Is No Excuse to Delay the Education Department’s New Title IX Regulations,” declared, “Those making this argument [for postponement] are taking advantage of a crisis to try to keep due process out of college campuses.” They are gaming the system.

The DOE reform returns due process to campuses. It also offers relief to lawsuit-prone schools that now function as police, judge and jury in handling students and faculty accused of sexual misconduct. Increasingly, colleges are sued in federal court by those who were found guilty without a fair hearing. As a headline in the Detroit Free Press stated. “Courts ruling on side of students accused of sexual assault. Here’s why.” The “why” is the violation of their due process rights.

Justice delayed is justice denied. And Justice must not be further denied.

Source: http://www.ifeminists.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.1467

Categories
Title IX

Let’s Not Delay Due Process On Campus


Under Title IX, colleges have an obligation to address sexual assault on campus.

Colleges have a corresponding obligation to treat all students fairly. Unfortunately, many colleges have created secret sex tribunals that stack the deck against accused students in order to increase discipline rates.

The tribunals often dispense with the presumption of innocence; deny students the right to see the specific charges or evidence against them; and deny accused students the opportunity to present evidence that might demonstrate consent, such as text messages.

Such procedures violate basic standards of fairness and have led to many miscarriages of justice.

Hundreds of students have successfully sued their colleges for unfair treatment.

But few colleges have altered their policies in response to such rulings.

It’s time for the Department of Education to issue regulations requiring schools to adopt fair and unbiased procedures.

Because without due process, there can be no justice.

Categories
Title IX

Civil Liberties Groups Push Title IX Rule Release

Two civil liberties groups have urged the U.S. Department of Education not to delay the release of proposed regulations under Title IX, the law prohibiting sex discrimination in institutions that receive federal funding, despite institutions’ occupation with the coronavirus pandemic.

The shift of colleges to primarily online operations means it is “an ideal time” for officials to change their policies to be in compliance with new Title IX regulations, the leaders of Speech First, a campus free speech organization, and the Independent Women’s Law Center, which advocates for reduced government control, wrote in a letter to Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Assistant Secretary Kenneth Marcus. The letter called attempts to delay the final regulations, which were proposed in November 2018, “a disingenuous attempt to put off indefinitely the implementation of rules that certain senators and special interest groups oppose on the merits.”

Several members of Congress and state attorneys general have called on DeVos to delay the final rule, suggesting that institutions are putting all efforts toward the basic needs of students during the coronavirus pandemic. But waiting on the rule would mean “biased investigatory procedures that stack the deck against the accused” will continue for students in the Title IX process at colleges, the letter said.

“All stakeholders in America’s institutions of higher education — from students and parents to faculty and administrators — deserve a just system, and they deserve it now,” Nicole Neily, president and founder of Speech First, said in a release. “At a time when the COVID-19 pandemic has created much uncertainty in the education community, the department can provide clarity with respect to Title IX by issuing the regulations as soon as possible.”

Categories
Campus Due Process Sexual Harassment

Open Letter to the 18 Attorneys General Opposed to the New Title IX Regulation

The long-awaited Department of Education regulations on adjudicating allegations of
sexual misconduct on college campuses are poised for release. In response, the
American Council on Education (ACE) (1) and eighteen state attorneys general (2) have
sought to block the guidelines. I believe this effort is misguided.

The regulations would restore basic fairness to sexual misconduct proceedings on
campus. Over the past ten years, a shadow legal system has simultaneously failed
either to sanction campus predators, or to provide basic due process rights to students
and faculty accused of sexual misconduct. This failed regulatory regime is a result of the
2011 Dear Colleague Letter, guidance from the U.S. Department of Education that
expanded Title IX to address campus sexual misconduct, including both sexual
harassment and sexual assault.

The failure of the existing system to ensure due process for accused faculty and
students is well documented. A 2016 report from the American Association of University
Professors assailed campuses for “inadequate protections of due process and
academic governance.” (3) Open letters from 28 faculty members at Harvard Law School (4)
and 15 professors at the University of Pennsylvania Law School (5) have shared similar
concerns, as did Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in a 2016 interview by
The Atlantic. (6) When challenged in court, colleges and universities have suffered over
170 setbacks to students accused of sexual misconduct. (7)

Nor has the existing system proved successful in reducing campus sexual misconduct.
Data collected by the Association of American Universities indicate that reports of
sexual assault, whether by physical force or inability to consent due to intoxication,
actually increased between 2015 and 2019. Moreover, only 45 percent of campus
survivors said that school officials were “very” or “extremely likely” to take their
allegations seriously. (8) And most infamously, the serial abuser Larry Nassar was
allowed to remain in his position at Michigan State University after the school’s Title IX coordinator somehow concluded in 2014 that Nassar’s behavior was “medically appropriate.” (9)

The American Council on Education and the eighteen state attorneys general offer
specious arguments for blocking the new regulations. In their open letter, ACE contends
that, “at a time when institutional resources already are stretched thin, colleges and
universities should not be asked to divert precious resources away from more critical
efforts in order to implement regulations unrelated to this extraordinary crisis.” Yet
colleges and universities have known for eighteen months that the new regulations were
forthcoming. Moreover, COVID-19 means that school Title IX officers, directly
responsible for implementing the guidelines, have more free time than ever before. With
campuses shuttered and students sent home, opportunities for campus sexual
misconduct have plummeted. In short, this is the ideal time for the new regulations to be
implemented.

The new Department of Education regulations aren’t perfect, but they will establish
adjudication mechanisms that are much fairer to accused students, faculty, and staff. A
fairer system, in turn, will enjoy greater support and credibility among stakeholders. And
with any luck, this means fewer dangerous predators on campus. For all these reasons,
I urge you to withdraw your opposition to the new regulations.

Citations:

1. https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Key-Issues/Higher-Education-Regulation/Letter-ED-
delayt9s117-032420v2FINAL.pdf
2. https://files.constantcontact.com/bfcd0cef001/71385110-7632-4adc-a7ae-0f47bc4f6801.pdf
3. https://www.aaup.org/report/history-uses-and-abuses-title-ix
4. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/14/rethink-harvard-sexual-harassment-
policy/HFDDiZN7nU2UwuUuWMnqbM/story.html
5. http://media.philly.com/documents/OpenLetter.pdf
6. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/ruth-bader-ginsburg-opens-up-about-metoo-voting-rights-
and-millenials/553409/
7. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0
8. http://www.saveservices.org/2020/04/aau-climate-surveys-reveal-failure-of-campus-sexual-assault-policies/

9. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/01/the-nassar-investigation-that-never-made-headlines/551717/

+++++++++++++++++++

State Attorneys General, Mailing Addresses 

JOSH SHAPIRO

Attorney General, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Office of the Attorney General

Strawberry Square

Harrisburg, PA 17120

 

XAVIER BACERRA

Attorney General, State of California

Office of the Attorney General

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

 

PHILIP J. WEISER

Attorney General, State of Colorado

Office of the Attorney General

Colorado Department of Law

Ralph L. Carr Judicial Building

1300 Broadway, 10th Floor

Denver, CO 80203

 

WILLIAM TONG

Attorney General, State of Connecticut

Office of the Attorney General

165 Capitol Avenue

Hartford, CT 06106

 

KATHLEEN JENNINGS

Attorney General, State of Delaware

Delaware Department of Justice,

Office of the Attorney General

Carvel State Building

820 N. French St.

Wilmington, DE 19801

 

KARL A. RACINE

Attorney General, District of Columbia

Office of the Attorney General

441 4th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20001

 

CLARE E. CONNORS

Attorney General, State of Hawai‘i

Department of the Attorney General

425 Queen Street

Honolulu, HI 96813

 

BRIAN FROSH

Attorney General, State of Maryland

Office of the Attorney General

200 St. Paul Place

Baltimore, MD 21202

 

MAURA HEALEY

Attorney General, Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Office of the Attorney General

1 Ashburton Place, 20th Floor

Boston, MA 02108

 

DANA NESSEL

Attorney General, State of Michigan

Office of the Attorney General

  1. Mennen Williams Building

525 W. Ottawa Street

P.O. Box 30212

Lansing, MI 48909

 

KEITH ELLISON

Attorney General, State of Minnesota

Office of the Attorney General

445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1400

St. Paul, MN 55101

 

AARON D. FORD

Attorney General, State of Nevada

Office of the Attorney General

100 North Carson Street

Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717

 

HECTOR BALDERAS

Attorney General, State of New Mexico

Office of the Attorney General

408 Galisteo Street

Villagra Building

Santa Fe, NM 87501​

 

LETITIA JAMES

Attorney General, State of New York

Office of the Attorney General

The Capitol

Albany, NY 12224-0341

 

JOSHUA H. STEIN

Attorney General, State of North Carolina

Office of the Attorney General

114 West Edenton Street

Raleigh, NC 2760

 

PETER F. NERONHA

Attorney General, State of Rhode Island

Office of the Attorney General

150 South Main Street

Providence, RI 02903

 

THOMAS J. DONOVAN, JR.

Attorney General, State of Vermont

Office of the Attorney General

109 State St

Montpelier, VT 05609

 

MARK R. HERRING

Attorney General, Commonwealth of Virginia

Office of the Attorney General

202 North Ninth Street

Richmond, Virginia 23219

Categories
Sexual Assault Title IX Uncategorized

National Women’s Law Center’s Bag of Title IX Tricks

On September 22, 2017, the Office for Civil Rights announced its withdrawal of the flawed 2011 Dear Colleague Letter. This unlawfully issued policy has been documented to have disastrous effects for students, faculty, and university administrators. [1] Fourteen months later, the Department of Education released its proposed Title IX regulations.

In a country grounded on democratic principles, all parties are certainly entitled to  debate a proposed rule. Almost everyone seemed to be playing nice in the sandbox. But the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) and their consortium of supporters devised and executed a plot to delay, delay, and delay.

First, in January 2018, NWLC filed suit against the Trump Administration to block the “new and extreme Title IX policy”, alleging it was unlawfully based on discriminatory stereotypes about women and girls as survivors of sexual violence. [2]  The court eventually dismissed the lawsuit.[3]

Second, during the Notice and Comment period that began November 29, 2018, the NWLC requested Secretary DeVos to extend the “Notice and Comment” period for 60 more days because, in their words, “The proposed 60-day period comes in the midst of the holiday season. This is a particularly busy time for students, who are juggling final exams, preparations for winter break, and traveling home for the holidays. Teachers and school administrators are similarly overburdened.” [4]

That’s right, we don’t want to inconvenience students’ holiday shopping plans, do we?

The Department of Education prudently rejected the NWLC request.

By the end of January 2019, the Department received over 100,000 comments [5], and according to their website, plenty of those comments came from the NWLC who told Betsy DeVos to “keep her hands off Title IX”. [6] NPR radio revealed, “Survivors’ advocates especially have been running these big campaigns on social media and hosting comment-writing events, especially on college campuses.” [7]

Wondering who organized these “big campaigns”? Read on….

Next came the opportunity for final public commentary on the regulation to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in which persons can meet in person or on the phone with OMB officials to share any lingering concerns.  The first meeting was held November 13, 2019. [8] Normally this step takes a couple days, certainly less than a week. But this time, the process stretched out over months, recently ending March 27.

In an Instagram video posted on April 3, Tulane University Title IX coordinator, Meredith Smith, spilled the beans. She revealed that the National Women’s Law Center orchestrated a strategy with various victim rights groups to request a seemingly endless string of meetings with the OMB, with the objective of delaying the release of the regulations. [9]

Smith explained: “So there was this delay strategy happening. We would hear that the Department of Education was about to release the regulations and then the National Women’s Law Center and all these other groups would parachute in and get more and more meetings on the calendar which push [the release date] back.”

The goal was to push the release date of the regulations to after the November 3 presidential election. Front-runner Democratic presidential candidate, Joe Biden, has vowed to restore the Obama era 2011 Dear Colleague letter guidance [10].

Even more recently the NWLC used the corona virus pandemic as an excuse, claiming “Now is hardly the right time to push forward with this fundamentally flawed rule.” [11]

The NWLC has utilized multiple tactics from their bag of tricks to strategically attempt to delay the release of the new regulations grounded in fairness and due process for now. And now, the cat is out of the bag!

Citations:

[1] https://www.thefire.org/dear-colleague-its-over-education-department-rescinds-controversial-2011-letter/

[2] https://nwlc.org/resources/nwlc-sues-betsy-devos-and-trump-administration-for-discriminating-against-student-survivors-of-sexual-violence/

[3] https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/DOESexAssaultGuidance-JUDGMENT.pdf

[4] https://nwlc.org/resources/nwlc-requests-dept-of-education-to-extend-title-ix-nprm-comment-period/

[5] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/11/29/2018-25314/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal

[6]https://nwlc.org/blog/nwlc-submits-comment-telling-betsy-devos-to-keep-her-handsoffix/

[7] https://www.npr.org/2019/01/30/690102168/litigation-is-likely-for-new-title-ix-guidelines

[8]https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eom12866SearchResults?view=yes&pagenum=34

[9] https://www.instagram.com/tv/B-hgmk0nRUz/?igshid=9tsk5uaj0e9m

[10] https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/12/joe-biden-promises-to-restore-obamas-disastrous-campus-kangaroo-courts/

[11] https://nwlc-ciw49tixgw5lbab.stackpathdns.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/NWLC-Letter-to-ED-and-OMB-re-COVID-19-and-Title-IX-3.25.20.pdf