Category: Sexual Harassment

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

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date January 12, 2023

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Links:

Campus Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Investigations Legal Press Release Sexual Harassment Title IX

Mass Opposition to Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 20, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Mass Opposition to Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act

WASHINGTON / December 20, 2022 – The Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act, recently introduced in the Senate (S. 5158) and House of Representatives (H.R. 9387), has ignited a wave of opposition.

The SAFER bill would dramatically broaden the meaning of “sexual harassment” to include virtually all conduct that is viewed as “unwelcome.” The bill would expand the definition of “sex,” thereby allowing for the participation of biological males in women’s sporting events. The Act would also remove key due process protections for the accused, such as the right to an impartial investigation, thereby undermining the presumption of innocence (1).

A SAVE public opinion survey, conducted in June by YouGov, revealed the following (2):

57% of Americans oppose revamping the Supreme Court’s definition of “sexual harassment.”
63% of Americans oppose changing the definition of “sex” to include “gender identity.”
71% of Americans oppose transgender participation in women’s sports.
87% of Americans want to retain the presumption of innocence in college disciplinary proceedings.

Accordingly, two statements were issued by groups during the past week that expressed strong opposition to the SAFER Act:

One Call to Action highlighted the fact that in recent months, two federal courts have issued decisions that nixed expanded definitions of “sex.” (3)
The Heritage Foundation charged, “There is no scientific or legal basis that supports changing ‘sex’ to ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’ in Title IX. Such a change threatens everyone’s freedoms, removes important due process protections for students in higher education, and puts girls and women in danger of physical harm.” (4)

In addition, an editorial revealed that 83% of college students currently report self-censoring their speech to avoid criticism. By expanding the definition of sexual harassment, the SAFER bill would dramatically worsen campus restrictions on free speech (5).

Co-sponsors of the SAFER Act are urged to withdraw their support for the SAFER Act bill and reaffirm their oath of office to “uphold and defend” the U.S. Constitution, including the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Links:

Campus Due Process False Allegations Investigations Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Trauma Informed

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

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 15, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SAVE urges lawmakers to oppose the SAFER Act.

Links:

Bills Campus Department of Education Discrimination Domestic Violence False Allegations Free Speech Sexual Harassment Title IX

SAFER Act Seeks Sweeping Changes to Redefine ‘Sex’ and ‘Sexual Harassment’

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 12, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

SAFER Act Seeks to Make Sweeping Changes to Redefine ‘Sex’ and ‘Sexual Harassment’

WASHINGTON / December 12, 2022 – Lawmakers recently introduced the Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act in both the Senate and House (1). The bill proposes to codify sweeping changes to the definitions of “sex” and “sexual harassment.”

Definition of Sex

The existing Title IX law, enacted in 1972, was designed to eliminate discrimination based on a student’s “sex.” But the SAFER bill seeks to expand this fundamental term to include sex stereotypes, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Gender identity is defined as “a person’s internal sense of gender, which could be female, male, or another gender.” (Section 101)

To date, two circuit courts have ruled against changing the Title IX definition of sex:

On July 15, 2022 a Tennessee District Court issued a Preliminary Injunction overturning the Department of Education’s Interpretation of Title IX to include “discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.” (2)
In a November 11, 2022 decision, a Texas District Court ruled in Neese v. Becerra that Title IX does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. (3)

Over 200 organizations have gone on record in opposition (4) to proposed changes to Title IX that would expand the definition of “sex,” which would impose devastating consequences on women’s sports (5), promote life-altering sex changes on underage children (6), and have long-term effects on parental rights (7).

Definition of Sexual Harassment

In Davis v. Monroe, the U.S. Supreme Court defined sexual harassment as harassment that is ‘‘so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive the victims of access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school.’’ (8)

But the SAFER bill proposes a broader definition of sexual harassment that would encompass virtually all sex-related conduct that is perceived as “unwelcome:”

“any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature, regardless of whether it is direct or indirect, or verbal or nonverbal (including conduct that is undertaken in whole or in part, through the use of electronic messaging services, commercial mobile services, electronic communications, or other technology), that unreasonably alters an individual’s terms, benefits, or privileges of an education program or activity, including by creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment.” (Section 203(i))

Such changes would exact harmful consequences on free speech (9) and open the door for a wave of false allegations of sexual misconduct and domestic violence (10). A former Washington State prosecutor explains the false allegations problem this way (11):

“The Department of Education has put immense pressure on higher education institutions to handle cases to their liking….As a result of this unfair treatment, innocent accused students, staff, and faculty find themselves expelled, fired or facing criminal charges.”

In Orwellian fashion, the bill sponsors make the remarkable claim that the SAFER Act will protect “all” students from discrimination (12).

SAVE urges lawmakers to strongly oppose the SAFER Act.

Links:

Bills Campus Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process False Allegations Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

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

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date October 10, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Citations:

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

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

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date September 19, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Citations:

Campus Due Process Free Speech Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Harassment Title IX

Title IX Network Groups Lead Effort to Bombard DOE with Over 240,000 Title IX Comments

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date September 15, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Title IX Network Groups Lead Effort to Bombard DOE with Over 240,000 Title IX Comments

WASHINGTON / September 15, 2022 – The Department of Education proposed a new Title IX regulation on June 23 that provoked widespread debate. In response, 240,085 public comments about the controversial policy were filed with the DOE before its September 12 deadline (1). Many of these comments were filed as a result of the efforts of over 160 groups that participate in the Title IX Network (2).

Following are examples of the outreach activities of several Title IX Network members to promote the submission of comments:

The Family Policy Alliance drafted a comment (3) and encouraged the submission of 13,000 comments by the members of its network.
The Texas Eagle Forum (4) sent an action alert to its subscribers/members, providing links to the SAVE website, including research links and submission instructions (5).
Speech First sent multiple emails to its email list of 110,000 members directing them to the comment submission pages of SAVE and the Defense of Freedom Institute (6), as well as to Speech First’s website (7).
United Families International created a dedicated webpage, including talking points, tips for effective writing of comments, instructions, and the link to the government portal, and sent several Action Alerts and reminders (8).
Katartismos Global sent information to the Anglican Church in North America, American Association of Evangelicals, and a national prayer initiative called the World Prayer Network (9).

SAVE submitted nine separate comments, including a listing of the organizations opposed to the draft regulation (10), the names of 235 religious leaders opposed to the Title IX policy (11), and an analysis of 175 judicial decisions in favor of campus due process (12).

The proposed Title IX regulation negates basic free speech and due process provisions of the Constitution, ignores the milestone Davis v. Monroe Supreme Court decision, subverts Congressional intent, and inexplicably contradicts the fundamental purpose of Title IX, which is to curb sex discrimination in schools.

SAVE calls on the Department of Education to promptly withdraw its ill-considered Title IX regulation.

Citations:

Campus Due Process False Allegations Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

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

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date August 26, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@endtodv.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Citations:

Campus Free Speech Gender Identity Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

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

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date August 22, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The deadline to submit Comments is September 12.

Citations:

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

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

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date August 18, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Citations: