Category: Press Release

Categories
Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

As Second Judge Strikes Down Title IX Regulation, Dept. of Education Resorts to Orwellian Clichés

PRESS RELEASE

Robert Thompson: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

As Second Judge Strikes Down Title IX Regulation, Department of Education Resorts to Orwellian Logic

WASHINGTON / June 24, 2024 – Federal Judge Danny Reeves handed down a preliminary injunction last Monday against the controversial Title IX regulation for the states of Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia (1). Reeves’ decision follows a similar ruling issued on June 13 by District Judge Doughty, who struck down the controversial regulation in Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho (2).

Using the phrase “arbitrary and capricious” eight times, Judge Reeves addressed the regulation’s subjective definitions of “gender identity,” women’s sports, student privacy and safety, free speech, parental rights, and more (3). The judge’s 93-page decision did not mince words (4) – the following is just a sampling:

  • “The Department’s new definition of ‘discrimination on the basis of sex wreaks havoc on Title IX and produces results that Congress could not have intended.” – Page 25
  • “The likely consequences of the Final Rule are virtually limitless…. the Final Rule creates myriad inconsistencies with Title IX’s text and its longstanding regulations.” – Page 27
  • “the Final Rule authorizes, if not encourages, arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement pursuant to definitions of harassment that are almost entirely fact-dependent.” – Page 55
  • “officials seemingly failed to seriously account for the possibility that abolishing sex-separated facilities would likely increase the incidence of crime and deter large swaths of the public from using public accommodations altogether.” – Page 75
  • “Rather than address the evidence provided by the plaintiff-States and others during the commenting period, the Department throws its figurative hands in the air and says, ‘too bad.’” – Page 76

Judge Reeves’ decision also highlighted the plight of a 15-year-old West Virginia biological girl referred to as “A.C.” Alluding to transgender athlete Becky Pepper-Jackson, a biological male, the judge wrote, “A.C. asserts that it is apparent that B.P.J.’s status as a biological male gives B.P.J. an advantage over A.C. and other female athletes.”

But A.C. is not the only person to have been harmed by the Department of Education’s Marxist-inspired Title IX mandate (5):

  1. Three middle school boys in Wisconsin were charged with a Title IX harassment complaint when they refused to refer to a female classmate as “they/them.” (6)
  2. John Abraham of Thomas Jefferson University was seduced and raped by Jessica Phillips at an alcohol-fueled party. When Abraham reported the assault to university Title IX officials, his complaint was ignored because, according to the favored narrative, “women never abuse.” (7)
  3. When Prisha Mosley developed mental health problems, doctors persuaded her undergo “gender-affirming” treatments, including removal of her breasts, at the age of 17. Last month, a North Carolina judge ruled that her lawsuit can move forward (8).

Rather than expressing compassion or remorse, the Department of Education responded to the judges’ recent decisions with a bureaucratic retort (9): “Title IX guarantees that no person experience sex discrimination in a federally-funded educational environment…we will continue to fight for every student.”

“Fight for every student”?

The Department’s tone-deaf dismissal recalls the infamous pronouncement of George Orwell: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was the final, most essential command.”

Links:

  1. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.kyed.104801/gov.uscourts.kyed.104801.100.0.pdf
  2. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.205659/gov.uscourts.lawd.205659.53.0.pdf
  3. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/29/2024-07915/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal
  4. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/06/arbitrary-and-capricious-federal-judge-rejects-and-ridicules-dept-of-educations-title-ix-rule/
  5. https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745341668/transgender-marxism/
  6. https://will-law.org/kiel-title-ix/#:~:text=Background%3A%20Three%20eighth%20grade%20students,District’s%20position%20appears%20to%20be
  7. https://www.inquirer.com/health/thomas-jefferson-university-john-abraham-rothman-20231207.html
  8. https://www.iwf.org/2024/05/17/independent-womens-forum-prisha-mosley-wins-legal-victory-groundbreaking-lawsuit-against-gender-affirming-medical-professionals/#:~:text=The%20lawsuit%20was%20brought%20against,at%20just%2017%20years%20old.
  9. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/13/title-ix-blocked-louisiana-00163364
Categories
Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Gender Agenda Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Federal Judge Blocks Sweeping Title IX Regulation in Four States, Stunning LGBTQ Advocates

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Federal Judge Blocks Sweeping Title IX Regulation in Four States, Stunning LGBTQ Advocates

WASHINGTON / June 17, 2024 – This past Thursday federal Judge Terry Doughty handed down a temporary injunction against the new Title IX regulation (1). The sweeping federal regulation, issued on April 19, makes numerous changes to the original Title IX law, including expanding the definition of sex to include “gender identity” (2).

Noting that Title IX “was written and intended to protect biological women from discrimination,” Louisiana District Judge Doughty reasoned, “Such purpose makes it difficult to sincerely argue that, at the time of enactment, ‘discrimination on the basis of sex’ included gender identity, sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, or sex characteristics. Enacting the changes in the Final Rule would subvert the original purpose of Title IX: protecting biological females from discrimination.”

The judge also ruled the new regulation violates the free speech clause of the Constitution, the Spending Clause, and the Administrative Procedures Act. Doughty’s ruling applies to the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho.

The transformative Title IX regulation is encountering strong opposition across the country (3). To date, a total of nine lawsuits have been filed to block the controversial Title IX policy (4):

  1. States of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, and the Independent Women’s Law Center, Independent Women’s Network, Parents Defending Education, and Speech First (5)
  2. States of Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia (6)
  3. States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Idaho, Louisiana Department of Education, Rapides Parish School Board, and 17 Louisiana School Districts (7)
  1. States of Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota (8)
  2. States of Kansas, Alaska, Utah, and Wyoming, Moms for Liberty, Young America’s Foundation, Female Athletes United, et al. (9)
  3. State of Texas and Two UT-Austin Professors (10)
  4. State of Oklahoma (11)
  5. Oklahoma Department of Education (12)
  6. Carroll Independent School District (Texas) (13)

Decisions on many of these complaints are expected during the upcoming month.

In addition, 68 members of the U.S. House of Representatives have co-sponsored H.J. Resolution 165 that seeks to block the controversial regulation (14).

Advocates for LGBTQ rights were furious over the judge’s decision. Human Rights Campaign president Kelley Robinson charged, “Today’s decision prioritizes anti-LGBTQ+ hate over the safety and well-being of students in the state. This is MAGA theatrics with the dangerous goal of weaving discrimination into law.” (15)

Earlier this month the Pew Research Center reported on the results of a national survey that shows 65% of registered voters believe whether a person is a man or woman is based on their biological sex at birth. In 2017, only 53% of voters believed that sex was biologically based (16).

Links:

  1. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.205659/gov.uscourts.lawd.205659.53.0.pdf
  2. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/29/2024-07915/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/04/do-not-comply-fight-americans-revolt-against-new-title-ix-rule/
  4. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  5. https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/TitleIxLawsuit.pdf
  6. https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/INAG/2024/04/30/file_attachments/2863214/Complaint%20-%20FINAL,1.42.pdf
  7. https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/file-stamped-louisiana-v-u-s-dep-t-of-education-title-ix-662fda6716ff7.pdf
  8. https://arkansasag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024-05-07-Arkansas-v.-US-Dept-of-Education-Filemarked.pdf
  9. https://www.slfliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2024/05/20240514-Complaint-Doc.-1.pdf
  10. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24705968-texas_bonevac_hatfield-v-deptofed-amended-complaint-224-cv-00086-z
  11. https://kfor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2024/05/24-05-06_complaint.pdf
  12. https://oklahoma-council.files.svdcdn.com/production/assets/img/Final-OSDE-Title-IX-Rule-Complaint.pdf?dm=1715092438
  13. https://dm1l19z832j5m.cloudfront.net/2024-05/Carroll-Independent-School-District-v-US-Dept-Ed-2024-05-21-Complaint.pdf
  14. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-joint-resolution/165/text?s=2&r=1&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22HJ+Res+165%22%7D
  15. https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/us-district-court-enjoins-new-title-ix-rule-in-louisiana-mississippi-montana-and-idaho-blocking-enforcement-of-federal-civil-rights-law-for-lgbtq-students
  16. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/06/06/gender-identity-sexual-orientation-and-the-2024-election/
Categories
Department of Education Discrimination Due Process Free Speech Gender Agenda Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

SAVE Stands in Support of Resolution 165 That Seeks to Block the New Title IX Regulation

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

SAVE Stands in Support of Resolution 165 That Seeks to Block the New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / June 12, 2024 – The Department of Education recently issued a new Title IX regulation that redefines sex to include “gender identity” (1). In response, 68 members of the U.S. House of Representatives are co-sponsoring a resolution that seeks to block the new regulation. H.J. Resolution 165 states simply:

“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Education relating to ‘Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance’ (89 Fed. Reg. 33474; published April 29, 2024), and such rule shall have no force or effect.” (2)

In support of the Resolution, Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx charged, “The Biden administration’s final rule hacks Title IX into pieces and expunges decades of progress for women and girls across the nation. This is a clear and present threat, and one that cannot go unaddressed.” (3)

To date, nine lawsuits have been filed to block the controversial Title IX policy (4):

  1. States of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, and the Independent Women’s Law Center, Independent Women’s Network, Parents Defending Education, and Speech First (5)
  2. States of Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia (6)
  3. States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Idaho, Louisiana Department of Education, Rapides Parish School Board, and 17 Louisiana School Districts (7)
  1. States of Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota (8)
  2. States of Kansas, Alaska, Utah, and Wyoming, Moms for Liberty, Young America’s Foundation, Female Athletes United, et al. (9)
  3. State of Texas and Two UT-Austin Professors (10)
  4. State of Oklahoma (11)
  5. Oklahoma Department of Education (12)
  6. Carroll Independent School District (Texas) (13)

The most comprehensive lawsuit, from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina (5), charges the new regulation not only promotes harmful gender transitioning among underage students, but also impairs free speech, parental rights, bathroom privacy, women’s sports, and due process for the falsely accused.

The new Title IX policy affirms the Marxist vision to bring about a “sexless” society. In the words of Shulamith Firestone, the end goal of feminist revolution must be the elimination of the “sex distinction itself: genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally…The tyranny of the biological family would be broken” (14).

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments – SAVE – strongly supports H.J. Resolution 165.

Links:

  1. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/29/2024-07915/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal
  2. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-joint-resolution/165/text?s=2&r=1&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22HJ+Res+165%22%7D
  3. https://marymiller.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-mary-miller-introduces-legislation-reverse-bidens-title-ix-rule-which#:~:text=WASHINGTON%20%E2%80%93%20Today%2C%20Congresswoman%20Mary%20Miller,women%20and%20girls’%20private%20spaces.
  4. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  5. https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/TitleIxLawsuit.pdf
  6. https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/INAG/2024/04/30/file_attachments/2863214/Complaint%20-%20FINAL,1.42.pdf
  7. https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/file-stamped-louisiana-v-u-s-dep-t-of-education-title-ix-662fda6716ff7.pdf
  8. https://arkansasag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024-05-07-Arkansas-v.-US-Dept-of-Education-Filemarked.pdf
  9. https://www.slfliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2024/05/20240514-Complaint-Doc.-1.pdf
  10. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24705968-texas_bonevac_hatfield-v-deptofed-amended-complaint-224-cv-00086-z
  11. https://kfor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2024/05/24-05-06_complaint.pdf
  12. https://oklahoma-council.files.svdcdn.com/production/assets/img/Final-OSDE-Title-IX-Rule-Complaint.pdf?dm=1715092438
  13. https://dm1l19z832j5m.cloudfront.net/2024-05/Carroll-Independent-School-District-v-US-Dept-Ed-2024-05-21-Complaint.pdf
  14. https://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/firestone-shulamith/dialectic-sex.htm
Categories
Campus Due Process False Allegations Free Speech Press Release Title IX

Blockbuster Lawsuit Filed Against 15 Women’s Rights Organizations for Defamation

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Lawrence DeMarco, LLM

Telephone: +1 215-901-1930

Email: ldemarco@boysandmen.net

Blockbuster Lawsuit Filed Against 15 Women’s Rights Organizations for Defamation

WASHINGTON / May 31, 2024 —   Saifullah Khan, a former Yale University student who was acquitted of rape charges in 2018, has filed a defamation lawsuit against 15 prominent women’s rights organizations. (1) The lawsuit alleges that despite Khan’s acquittal in a court of law, the defendants falsely labeled him a “rapist” in a legal filing, causing severe damage to his reputation. (2)

Khan, an Afghan refugee who came to the United States as a child, was a full scholarship student at Yale University. In 2015, he was accused of sexual assault by a female classmate following a Halloween party. Following a highly publicized trial in 2018, the jury found Khan not guilty on all charges. (3)

Despite the acquittal, Yale University launched an internal disciplinary proceeding, found him responsible for sexual misconduct, and expelled him. Khan then sued Yale in 2019 for $110 million, claiming the university had denied him due process. (4)

Normally, accusers are granted immunity by courts when they testify in a legal proceeding. But in this case, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled last June that Yale’s disciplinary procedures lacked adequate due process protections to provide the accuser immunity for her testimony, allowing Khan’s accuser to be potentially held liable for defamation (5).

Two weeks ago, Khan expanded his legal battle, filing a new defamation suit against 15 women’s rights organizations, including the National Women’s Law Center, Legal Momentum, Jewish Women International, and others. (6) The complaint alleges these groups falsely characterized Khan as a “rapist” and made other defamatory statements in a legal filing, which caused him substantial reputational harm.

“I was acquitted in a court of law, yet trusted and powerful organizations continued to defame me,” stated Khan.  He further explained that he doesn’t have a national agenda, but just wants to clear his name. (1)

The defendants, with combined assets exceeding $200 million, have not yet publicly responded to the suit. However, the case is likely to raise important questions about the boundaries of protected speech versus defamation in the context of sexual misconduct allegations during school hearings.

Links:

  1. https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-former-yale-student-acquitted-of-rape-charges-files-defamation-lawsuit-against-15-liberal-organizations#google_vignette
  2. https://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentDisplayer.aspx?AppId=2&DocId=qIg2wdaGkywLFsHjxUajVA%3d%3d
  3. https://www.thecut.com/2018/03/yale-student-saifullah-khan-not-guilty-rape-trial.html
  4. https://thepostmillennial.com/former-yale-student-cleared-to-sue-accuser-over-false-allegations
  5. https://freespeechproject.georgetown.edu/tracker-entries/connecticut-supreme-court-repeals-absolute-immunity-for-accuser-in-yale-sexual-assault-case/
  6. https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=27589553
Categories
Department of Education Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Letter to House Speaker Johnson

May 16, 2024

RE: Establishment of a House Task Force to End the Weaponization of the Department of Education

Speaker Mike Johnson

H-232, The Capitol

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Speaker Johnson:

On April 19, the Department of Education released its new Title IX regulation that changes the definition of “sex.” This new policy will cause harmful, systemic effects on children, schools, families, and ultimately to our entire society.

Response to the new regulation has been extremely negative.[1],[2],[3], [4],

In particular:

  • Seven lawsuits from 22 states have been filed in federal courts to block the regulation. [5]
  • Impressively, one of the lawsuits features 17 school districts in Louisiana as plaintiffs. [6]
  • Numerous states already have declared they will not follow the new policy, including AR, FL, LA, NE, OK, and SC. [7]

The excesses of Title IX have become a bi-partisan concern. A recent poll of 1,600 registered voters revealed a majority of persons now support state laws that would require children to wait until age 18 before they can receive transgender treatments: Republicans: 73%, Democrats: 61%.[8]

On May 9, representatives from several member-organizations of the Title IX Network [9] held meetings with staffers of 18 Members of the House of Representatives. The purpose of the meetings was to recommend the establishment of a Task Force of key House Members to confer on strategies to end the weaponization of the Department of Education.

During these meetings, we recommended that the Task Force consider these three broad options:

  1. Major appropriations reductions
  2. Major reorganization of the Department of Education
  3. Complete abolition of the Department of Education

Staffer response to this recommendation was uniformly and strongly positive.

During the meetings, we urged that the Task Force be established now, before the November elections.

We also highlighted that the House Appropriations Committee had succeeded in approving important budget reductions in its FY24 Labor-HHS-Education bill:

  • Section 244: Prohibits the implementation of Biden’s Executive Order on “Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.”
  • Section 311: Prohibits the Department of Education from implementing the proposed Title IX regulations that were issued in July 2022 and in April 2023.
  • Section 312: Protects religious liberty in schools.
  • Section 534: Prohibits the use of federal funds for hormone therapy or surgical treatment for “gender-affirming care.”
  • Section 535: Prohibits the implementation of any other “diversity, equity, inclusion office, program, or training.”

Although these cuts did not survive to the final approved version of the Labor-HHS-Education bill, they represent an important first step of the process of restoring accountability to the Department of Education.

You may be aware that the Heritage Foundation already has developed a roadmap for this process.[10] This document may be a good starting point for the Task Force’s deliberations.

Based on the positive responses during our May 9 meetings, the following member-organizations of the Title IX Network hereby request that you promptly establish a Task Force to end the weaponization of the Department of Education.

We look forward to working with you. If you have further questions, feel free to contact Bob Thompson at rthompson@saveservices.org

Sincerely,

National Groups (31)

SAVE (Stop Abusive and Violent Environments)

AFA Action

Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization

AMAC Action

American Association of Evangelicals

American Association of Senior Citizens

American Life & Liberty PAC

America Values

Awake Americans

Catholics Count

Center for Equal Opportunity

Center for Military Readiness

Conservatives of Faith

ConservativeHQ.com

Eagle Forum

Global Strategic Alliance

Katartismos Global

Law Offices of Philip A. Byler

Less Government

Men and Women for a Representative Democracy in America

Mission America

National Association of Scholars

No Left Turn in Education

Palm Beach Freedom Institute

Project 21 Black Leadership Network

Radiance Foundation

60 Plus Association

Strategic Coalitions and Initiatives, LLC

Tradition, Family, Property, Inc.

United Against Racism in Education

Women for Democracy in America

 

State Groups (21):

American Life & Liberty PAC, Virginia

Awake Illinois

Child Protection League Action

Eagle Forum of Alabama

Eagle Forum of Michigan

Independent Women’s Network, Bismarck Chapter

Louisiana Save Our Schools

Middle Resolution

Moms for Liberty Howard County, Maryland

Moms for Liberty Talbot County, Maryland

Ohio Value Voters

Parents on the Level

Protect Ohio Children Coalition

Roughrider Policy Center

Scottsdale Unites for Educational Integrity

Texas Eagle Forum

Texas Freedom Coalition

Utah Citizens for the Constitution

Utah Eagle Forum

Virginia Association of Scholars

Wisconsin Family Action

 

Cc: Virginia Foxx, Chairperson, Committee on Education and the Workforce

Cc: Other Republican Members of the House of Representatives

Links:

[1] https://nypost.com/2024/04/23/opinion/bidens-new-title-ix-rules-prove-its-time-for-the-doe-to-be-doa/

[2] https://www.newsweek.com/biden-admin-weaponizing-title-ix-promote-fringe-sexual-politics-opinion-1894635

[3] https://thefederalist.com/2023/04/14/from-title-ix-to-title-none-biden-kills-womens-sports-and-safety/

[4] https://thewordofdamocles.substack.com/p/another-biden-administration-attack

[5] https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/

[6] https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/file-stamped-louisiana-v-u-s-dep-t-of-education-title-ix-662fda6716ff7.pdf

[7] https://www.saveservices.org/2024/05/naked-attempt-to-strong-arm-our-schools-five-lawsuits-seek-to-block-sweeping-title-ix-rule/

[8] https://www.dailywire.com/news/majority-of-voters-support-state-laws-protecting-children-from-trans-procedures-poll

[9] https://www.saveservices.org/2022-Policy/

[10] https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_CHAPTER-11.pdf

Categories
Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Legal Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Harassment Title IX

‘Naked attempt to strong-arm our schools:’ Five Lawsuits Seek to Block Sweeping Title IX Rule

 PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

‘Naked attempt to strong-arm our schools:’ Five Lawsuits Seek to Block Sweeping Title IX Rule

WASHINGTON / May 6, 2024 – It’s not often that a new federal regulation triggers such revulsion that five lawsuits are filed within days of its release. On April 19 the Department of Education issued its long-awaited Title IX regulation, which redefines sex to include “gender identity” (1). Within 11 days, five complaints against the new policy had been filed in federal courts by the following groups:

  1. States of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, and the Independent Women’s Law Center, Independent Women’s Network, Parents Defending Education, and Speech First (2)
  2. States of Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia (3)
  3. States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho (4)
  4. State of Texas (5)
  5. Rapides Parish (Louisiana) School Board (6)

All of the lawsuits contend the new regulation exceeds the Department of Education’s legal authority, and violates the Administrative Procedure Act because its provisions are arbitrary and capricious.

The lawsuit from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, the most comprehensive of the five, charges the new regulation not only promotes harmful gender transitioning among underage students, but also impairs free speech, parental rights, bathroom privacy, women’s sports, and due process for the falsely accused.

The lawsuit from the Attorneys General of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho charges the Title IX rule is a “naked attempt to strong-arm our schools into molding our children … in the government’s preferred image of how a child should think, act, and speak” (3) — an accusation that recalls the Communist Party’s earlier crusade to mold an obedient “New Soviet Man” (7).

The lawsuit from the Rapides Parish School Board documents the myriad policy changes that schools would be required to make. The complaint states defiantly, “The school board does not have and does not intend to adopt a policy mandating that staff or students use pronouns that reflect students’ perceived gender identity when doing so is inconsistent with a student’s sex.”

Indeed, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill commented, “This is all for a political agenda, ignoring significant safety concerns for young women students in preschools, elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, colleges and universities across Louisiana and the entire country” (8).

The new – some would say, revolutionary – Title IX policy accords with the Marxist vision to bring about a “sexless” society. In the words of Shulamith Firestone, the end goal of feminist revolution must be the elimination of the “sex distinction itself: genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally…The tyranny of the biological family would be broken” (9).

In addition, the governors of Arkansas (10) and Nebraska (11) ordered their schools to ignore the new Title IX policy. The previous week, similar directives had been issued in Florida, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and South Carolina (12).

The new regulation will impose sweeping changes on our nation’s schools. Brett Sokolow, head of the Association for Title IX Administrators, predicts that “60-70% of what we have in place now will need to change in some way to comply with the new Rule” (13).

Which means dramatically increased budgets and institutional clout for the highly politicized Title IX offices across the nation.

Links:

  1. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/29/2024-07915/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal
  2. https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/TitleIxLawsuit.pdf
  3. https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/INAG/2024/04/30/file_attachments/2863214/Complaint%20-%20FINAL,1.42.pdf
  4. https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/file-stamped-louisiana-v-u-s-dep-t-of-education-title-ix-662fda6716ff7.pdf
  5. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/Title%20IX%20Complaint%20FIled.pdf
  6. https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/RapidesParishSchoolBoardComplaint.pdf
  7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Soviet_man#:~:text=From%20its%20roots%20in%20the,post%2Dscarcity%20and%20unprecedented%20scientific
  8. https://dfipolicy.org/press-release-the-defense-of-freedom-institute-and-the-states-of-louisiana-mississippi-montana-and-idaho-first-to-file-lawsuit-against-biden-administration-over-new-title-ix-rules/
  9. https://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/firestone-shulamith/dialectic-sex.htm
  10. https://governor.arkansas.gov/news_post/sanders-signs-an-executive-order-to-protect-arkansas-students-women-and-girls/
  11. https://www.centralnebraskatoday.com/2024/05/03/gov-pillen-nebraska-will-not-comply-with-the-biden-administrations-rewrite-of-title-ix/
  12. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/04/do-not-comply-fight-americans-revolt-against-new-title-ix-rule/
  13. https://www.atixa.org/blog/title-ix-youve-never-had-a-regs-implementation-like-this-before/
Categories
Department of Justice Domestic Violence Law Enforcement Press Release

DOJ’s Kristen Clarke Stabbed Her Husband, Then Engaged in a Five-Year Cover-Up

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

DOJ’s Kristen Clarke Stabbed Her Husband, Then Engaged in a Five-Year Cover-Up

WASHINGTON / May 2, 2024 – The Centers for Disease Control reports that more men than women are victims of domestic violence. Each year, 6.5 million men, compared to 5.7 million women, fall prey to intimate partner aggression (1).

Consistent with these findings, a new report reveals a high-level female official at the U.S. Department of Justice attacked her husband, evaded prosecution, and sought to remove the incident from the public record.

A recent Daily Signal exposé reveals the following (2):

  1. On July 4, 2006, Kristen Clarke attacked her husband, Reginald Avery, slicing his finger to the bone. Maryland police arrested Clarke that night. A criminal case against Clarke was initiated in the District Court of Maryland.
  2. On Oct. 17, 2006, a Maryland state attorney entered a request of “nolle prosequi,” effectively dismissing the charge without a trial.
  3. On January 10, 2008, Clarke obtained an “Order for Expungement of Police and Court Records” for the arrest, thereby obscuring the incident from the public record.
  4. On January 7, 2021, President-elect Joe Biden nominated Clarke to serve as the head of the Department of Justice’s high-profile Civil Rights Division.
  5. During her April 21 confirmation hearing, Sen. Tom Cotton asked nominee Clarke, “Since becoming a legal adult, have you ever been arrested for or accused of committing a violent crime against any person?” Clarke dishonestly answered, “No.”

The weakening and dissolution of the nuclear family has long been a central objective of Marxist activists (3). Accordingly, feminists have created numerous domestic violence myths that are designed to divert attention from the reality of female-initiated violence (4).

For example, Gloria Steinem famously claimed that “Patriarchy requires violence, or the subliminal threat of violence, in order to maintain itself” (5). Such falsehoods have served to frighten women and vilify men, eventually undermining the institution of marriage.

Basic notions of fairness and justice have been compromised, as well. Even though a majority of abuse perpetrators are female, the Department of Justice reports that inexplicably, 81% of intimate partner violence arrestees are male (6).

Indeed, female-perpetrated violence is a hidden epidemic in our society (7). Last week, the media reported on a Kansas mother who cut off the head of her 6-year-old son (8). One week before that, an Arizona woman pled guilty to poisoning her husband by pouring bleach into his coffee (9).

SAVE urges lawmakers to undertake a thorough re-evaluation of the domestic violence laws within their jurisdiction, to assure these policies are based on principles of science and justice, not Marxist ideology. And chivalrous judges and law enforcement personnel need to stop giving female abusers a free pass.

Links:

  1. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs/nisvsreportonipv_2022.pdf Tables 9 and 11.
  2. https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/04/30/exclusive-dojs-kristen-clarke-testified-she-was-never-arrested-court-records-and-text-messages-indicate-she-was/amp/
  3. https://www.simplypsychology.org/marxist-feminism.html
  4. https://endtodv.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Thirty-Years-of-DV-Half-Truths-Falsehoods-and-Lies.pdf
  5. https://libquotes.com/gloria-steinem/quote/lbg2a6f
  6. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvs.pdf , Table 5.9.
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2023/11/mentoo-documentary-exposes-inconvenient-truths-about-domestic-violence/
  8. https://leoaffairs.com/kansas-mother-who-chopped-off-her-sons-head-while-singing-will-be-tried-in-court/
  9. https://nypost.com/2024/04/10/us-news/melody-felicano-johnson-pleads-guilty-to-poisoning-air-force-husband-coffee-maker/
Categories
Campus Department of Education Due Process Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

‘DO NOT COMPLY. FIGHT.’ Americans Revolt Against New Title IX Rule

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

‘DO NOT COMPLY. FIGHT.’ Americans Revolt Against New Title IX Rule

WASHINGTON / April 29, 2024 – Release of the final Title IX regulation on April 19 has triggered a wave of protests against the policy, which seeks to transform our schools, reshape the family, and redefine the Constitution (1). That same day, media personality Megyn Kelly captured the national mood with this social media post: “DO NOT COMPLY. FIGHT.” (2)

In response to the new rule, state superintendents of education around the country issued directives to their schools:

Florida: Noting that the “Biden Administration maims the [Title IX] statute beyond recognition in an attempt to gaslight the country,” Commissioner of Education Manny Diaz instructed Florida schools, “At Governor Ron DeSantis’ direction, no educational institution should begin implementing any changes.” [bolding in the original] (3)

Louisiana: Superintendent Cade Brumley wrote to all school boards in the state, “The Title IX rule changes recklessly endanger students and seek to dismantle equal opportunities for females….Further, it remains my position that schools should not alter policies or procedures at this time.” (4)

Oklahoma: Charging the new rule would turn “not using preferred pronouns into a Title IX violation,” instructed schools, Superintendent Ryan Walters advised Oklahoma schools, “Please do not make any district policy changes based on the new Title IX regulations. These federal rule changes are illegal.” (5)

South Carolina: Superintendent Ellen Weaver warned schools, “By redefining the class of people that Title IX intends to protect, the Biden administration’s rule seeks to change the meaning and purpose of the underlying law.” Weaver then advised, “Therefore, we recommend districts not implement the new rule at this time. It is possible—even likely—that a court will enjoin the rule prior to its effective date.” [underlining in the original] (6)

Wyoming: State Superintendent Megan Degenfelder promised, “I will fight back against this federal overreach… and work to partner with my counterparts across the country to stand up to the Biden administration’s harmful regulations.” (7)

Within days of the release of the new regulation, denunciations were issued by organizations such as the Heritage Foundation (8), Defense of Freedom Institute (9), and the National Association of Scholars (10). Attorney Justin Dillon catalogued 16 ways that the new policy will decimate fairness and due process for falsely accused male students (11).

And strongly worded articles were published by the American Spectator (12), Get Bright (13), Reason (14), New York Post (15), The Free Press (16), and elsewhere.

Two organizations announced their plans to challenge the regulation in court: Independent Women’s Forum (17) and Alliance Defending Freedom (18), with a raft of additional lawsuits currently being drafted.

Such developments recall the mood that preceded the Boston Tea Party in 1773.

Citations:

  1. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/
  2. https://twitter.com/megynkelly/status/1781347648575774988
  3. https://flvoicenews.com/florida-will-fight-u-s-dept-of-educations-title-ix-rules-calls-it-an-attempt-to-gaslight-the-country/
  4. https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/dr-cade-brumley-title-ix-memo-4-22-2024-6627db14b1f9c.pdf
  5. https://twitter.com/BreccanFThies/status/1783136137348808861
  6. https://www.counton2.com/news/south-carolina-news/ellen-weaver-tells-south-carolina-schools-to-ignore-bidens-revised-title-ix-rules-for-lbgtq-students/
  7. https://www.wyomingnewsnow.tv/2023/04/14/superintendent-degenfelder-speaks-out-against-bidens-title-ix-proposal/
  8. https://www.heritage.org/press/heritage-expert-illegal-title-ix-rule-erases-women-ignores-the-constitution
  9. https://dfipolicy.org/statement-dfi-releases-statement-on-biden-administrations-final-title-ix-rule/
  10. https://www.nas.org/blogs/press_release/press-release-the-national-association-of-scholars-denounces-new-biden-title-ix-rule#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20National%20Association%20of%20Scholars,now%20taken%20two%20steps%20back.)
  11. https://www.dillonpllc.com/guide-to-2024-title-ix-regulations
  12. https://spectator.org/bidens-title-ix-revisions-arent-good-news-for-women/
  13. https://getbright.substack.com/p/what-bidens-title-ix-change-means
  14. https://reason.com/2024/04/19/new-title-ix-rules-erase-campus-due-process-protections/
  15. https://nypost.com/2024/04/22/opinion/bidens-title-ix-revisions-are-a-repulsive-attempt-to-erase-truth/
  16. https://www.thefp.com/p/biden-title-ix-civil-rights-rollback
  17. https://www.iwf.org/2024/04/19/bidens-title-ix-rewrite-strips-away-protections-for-women-denies-women-equal-opportunity/
  18. https://twitter.com/KWaggonerADF/status/1781327179936108975
Categories
Campus Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process Gender Agenda Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

‘See you in court, @POTUS:’ Conservatives and Liberals Livid Over New Title IX Rule

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

‘See you in court, @POTUS:’ Conservatives and Liberals Livid Over New Title IX Rule

WASHINGTON / April 23, 2024 – The U.S. Department of Education released on April 19 its long-awaited Title IX regulation (1). If allowed to stand, the effects of the controversial rule will be numerous, long-lasting, and severe.

Most profoundly, the policy changes the definition of sex to include “gender identity,” allowing biological males to freely participate in women’s sports (2). And Reason fumed over the rule’s harmful effects on campus due process: “the new rules allow students to be found guilty of assaulting a classmate without ever seeing the full evidence against them” (3).

In short order, conservative-leaning organizations issued statements condemning the new policy, including the Heritage Foundation (4), Defense of Freedom Institute (5), and the National Association of Scholars (6).

Less anticipated were statements by liberal organizations that also were critical of the regulation:

Gays Against Groomers: The liberal-leaning Gays Against Groomers thundered, “By replacing sex with gender identity, all prior protections put in place will be wiped away. It is a dystopian nightmare, masqueraded as progress” (7).

ACLU: Four years ago, the ACLU filed a lawsuit opposing the 2020 Title IX regulation that was designed to curb campus Kangaroo Courts (8). But last week the ACLU did an apparent about-face, criticizing several due process provisions of the new regulation, such as its acceptance of the single-investigator, “judge, jury, and executioner” model, and its removal of the requirement for a live hearing (9).

Twitter readers expressed their anger and disappointment, as well (10):

  • Wendy and Lucy: “The destruction of female sports. Horrifying!”
  • KLee: “So you’re now representing men instead of women? Are you going to be officially changing the name of your organization as well?”
  • Don’tBeAJagooff: “I cannot believe you think this is a good thing. This is awful for females.”
  • Diogenes Sarcastica: “Thanks for f*cking up women’s sports!”

Release of the new regulation does not signal an end to the Title IX controversy. The Independent Women’s Forum promptly announced that it is “preparing to sue the Biden administration to enjoin this unlawful action” (11). And the Alliance Defending Freedom issued this blunt challenge: “See you in court, @POTUS.” (12)

Links:

  1. https://titleixforall.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Unofficial-version-of-the-final-regulations.pdf
  2. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/womens-sports/
  3. https://reason.com/2024/04/19/new-title-ix-rules-erase-campus-due-process-protections/
  4. https://www.heritage.org/press/heritage-expert-illegal-title-ix-rule-erases-women-ignores-the-constitution
  5. https://dfipolicy.org/statement-dfi-releases-statement-on-biden-administrations-final-title-ix-rule/
  6. https://www.nas.org/blogs/press_release/press-release-the-national-association-of-scholars-denounces-new-biden-title-ix-rule#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20National%20Association%20of%20Scholars,now%20taken%20two%20steps%20back.
  7. https://twitter.com/againstgrmrs/status/1781711340156997718
  8. https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/know-your-ix-v-devos?redirect=know-your-ix-v-devos
  9. https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/155090
  10. https://twitter.com/nwlc/status/1781308768795394347
  11. https://www.iwf.org/2024/04/19/bidens-title-ix-rewrite-strips-away-protections-for-women-denies-women-equal-opportunity/
  12. https://twitter.com/KWaggonerADF/status/1781327179936108975
Categories
Feminism Gender Agenda Press Release

Does Wokeism Pose a Mental Health Threat to Women?

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Does Wokeism Pose a Mental Health Threat to Women?

WASHINGTON / April 19, 2024 – The ongoing mental health crisis among young, liberal women has been well documented (1). Last month, a study from Finland revealed women were five times more likely than men to embrace “woke” attitudes, and these women were more prone to report lower levels of mental well-being such as anxiety and depression (2).

Three recent incidents illustrate how liberal, well-educated females indulge in wokeism. Their actions include betrayal of the oath of office, outright dishonesty, and hyper-partisanship:

1. Ketanji Brown Jackson: Supreme Court Justice Jackson revealed during a recent media censorship case that her biggest concern was the “First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways” (3).

Apparently she was unaware that the entire point of the First Amendment is to do exactly that – to restrain the power of the government from intruding into the lives of private citizens. Judge Jackson’s comments appeared to contradict her oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” (4).

Combined with her previous “I’m not a biologist” remark, Judge Jackson’s “hamstringing” comment raises questions about her objectivity and fitness to serve on the High Court.

2. Sharon Malone, MD: Doctor Malone was the guest for an April 4 interview on National Public Radio to discuss woman’s health. Echoing the woman-as-victim narrative, she made this dubious claim: “it wasn’t until 1993 that women were even included in clinical trials” (5).

But the facts reveal Malone’s statement to be an outright fabrication:

  • As early as 1979, 96% of all NIH clinical trials included women (6).
  • An analysis of enrollees in National Cancer Center clinical trials in 1989 reported 57% female participation (7).
  • Overall, “women routinely participated in clinical trials, and in numbers that are more than proportionate to the number of women in the overall population,” according to a third review (8).

3. Katherine Maher: Endowed with a gold-plated resume, Maher was hired in March to serve as the chief executive of National Public Radio. Maher has issued numerous partisan tweets that condemn “white complicity,” the “system of oppression founded on treating people’s ancestors as private property,” and much more (9).

But in a moment of lucidity, Katherine Maher admitted to indulging in her “hysteric white woman” voice (10). Maher’s candid admission of hysteria echoes the above-mentioned study from Finland.

In her April 3 column, Canadian Amy Hamm offers this insight for the current rash of female wokeism: “Perhaps it is not a tendril of our good nature that makes women ‘woker’ than men, but merely a reflection of our darker, malicious side” (11).

And commentator Janice Fiamengo floats this controversial idea: “If a significant subset of women are incapable of acting in their own best interests, let alone in those of society as a whole—particularly the best interests of (female) children—is it not time to rethink the alleged equal capacity of women to lead our societies?” (12)

Links:

  1. https://www.konstantinkisin.com/p/why-im-worried-about-the-rise-of
  2. https://nypost.com/2024/03/17/lifestyle/woke-people-more-likely-to-be-unahppy-anxious-and-depressed-new-study-suggests/
  3. https://thefederalist.com/2024/03/18/justice-jackson-complains-first-amendment-is-hamstringing-feds-censorship-efforts/
  4. https://nypost.com/2024/01/25/business/nprs-new-ceo-katherine-maher-scrubs-partisan-posts-trump-is-a-racist/
  5. https://www.npr.org/2024/04/09/1243606086/what-women-can-do-and-should-do-to-protect-their-health
  6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8306005/
  7. https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article-abstract/83/1/16/961338?redirectedFrom=fulltext
  8. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3703886
  9. https://www.city-journal.org/article/quotations-from-chairman-maher
  10. https://nypost.com/2024/01/25/business/nprs-new-ceo-katherine-maher-scrubs-partisan-posts-trump-is-a-racist/
  11. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/wokeness-hurts-women-why-do-so-many-support-it?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
  12. https://fiamengofile.substack.com/p/women-like-jk-rowling-will-not-free