DOCSLIB.ORG

Equal Rights Advocates V. United

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Equal Rights Advocates V. United Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 23 Filed 02/21/18 Page 1 of 45 1 Jennifer A. Reisch (CA Bar No. 223671) Equal Rights Advocates 2 1170 Market Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94102 3 Ph: (415) 896-0672 4 Fax: (415) 231-0011 Emails: [email protected] 5 Javier M. Guzman* 6 Skye L. Perryman* Robin Thurston* 7 Karianne Jones* 8 Democracy Forward Foundation 1333 H St. NW 9 Washington, DC 20005 Ph: (202) 448-9090 10 Fax: (202) 701-1775 11 Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 12 Leecia Welch (CA Bar No. 208741) 13 Alice Y. Abrokwa* National Center for Youth Law 14 405 14th Street, 15th Floor 15 Oakland, CA 94612, and 1313 L Street, NW, Suite 130 16 Washington, DC 20005 Ph: (510) 835-8098 17 Fax: (510) 835-8099 Emails: [email protected], [email protected] 18 19 Emily Martin* Neena Chaudhry* 20 Sunu Chandy* Alexandra Brodsky* 21 National Women’s Law Center 11 Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 800 22 Washington, DC 20036 23 Ph: (202) 588-5180 Fax: (202) 588-5185 24 Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 25 *pro hac vice motions filed or forthcoming 26 Counsel for Plaintiffs 27 28 Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief; Case No.: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Page: 1 Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 23 Filed 02/21/18 Page 2 of 45 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 3 SURVJUSTICE, INC., ) ) 4 1015 15th Street NW, Suite 632 Washington, DC 20005, ) ) 5 ) EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES ) 6 1170 Market Street, Suite 700 ) San Francisco, CA 94102, ) 7 ) ) 8 VICTIM RIGHTS LAW CENTER 520 SW Yamhill Street ) Portland, OR 97204, ) Case Number: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC 9 ) ) 10 Plaintiffs, ) ) 11 v. ) AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 12 ELISABETH D. DEVOS, in her official ) ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 13 capacity as Secretary of Education, ) 400 Maryland Avenue SW ) 14 Washington, DC 20202, ) ) 15 CANDICE JACKSON, in her official ) ) 16 capacity as Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, ) ) 17 400 Maryland Avenue SW ) Washington, DC 20202, ) 18 ) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ) 19 400 Maryland Avenue SW ) ) 20 Washington, DC 20202, ) ) 21 Defendants. ) ) 22 23 24 1. Plaintiffs SurvJustice, Inc., Equal Rights Advocates, and Victim Rights Law Center bring 25 this action against Defendants U.S. Department of Education (“the Department” or “the 26 agency”), Secretary Elisabeth DeVos, and Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Candice 27 Jackson seeking vacatur of the Department’s new policy, as expressed in a Dear Colleague Letter 28 Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief; Case No.: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Page: 2 Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 23 Filed 02/21/18 Page 3 of 45 1 and Question and Answers guidance issued on September 22, 2017 (hereinafter jointly referred 2 to as the “2017 Title IX policy”), concerning Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 3 (“Title IX”). 4 2. Over 45 years ago, Congress enacted Title IX to prohibit discrimination on the basis of 5 sex in educational programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance (hereinafter 6 7 “recipients” or “educational institutions”). This landmark civil rights law has helped fight sex 8 discrimination and promote equal educational access and opportunities for girls and women from 9 the classroom to the playing field. 10 3. Twenty years ago, acting on the basis of Supreme Court decisions and the recognition 11 that Title IX’s promise of equality is hollow if a student can be subjected to sexual harassment 12 with impunity, the Department issued its first guidance to educational institutions (both K-12 13 schools and institutions of higher education) on the standards that govern their response to sexual 14 15 harassment, a form of sex discrimination. Since then, through several successive guidance 16 materials issued under Administrations led by both political parties, the Department has 17 reaffirmed that Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination requires recipients to prevent and 18 redress sex and gender-based harassment. These policies recognize that students who experience 19 sexual harassment, including in its most extreme form, sexual violence, suffer not only 20 physically and emotionally, but also in their ability to participate in and benefit from educational 21 opportunities, on the basis of their sex. 22 23 4. The reaffirmation of Title IX’s protections continued until September 2017, when the 24 Department formally rescinded sexual violence guidance documents issued in 2011 and 2014— 25 purportedly because they were issued without notice and comment—and issued new conflicting 26 27 28 Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief; Case No.: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Page: 3 Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 23 Filed 02/21/18 Page 4 of 45 1 policy documents to educational institutions—without notice and comment.1 The 2017 Title IX 2 policy is substantively unlawful and procedurally deficient. It conflicts with existing Title IX 3 requirements and fails to provide a reasoned justification for its reversal in position. It is also 4 based on a legally and factually mistaken view that earlier guidance limited due process 5 protections for students. And in issuing the 2017 Title IX policy, the Department failed to take 6 7 into account reliance interests that students, and organizations like Plaintiffs that work with 8 students, have in the protections set out in prior guidance documents. 9 5. The 2017 Title IX policy imposes significant changes on educational institutions and on 10 students. For example, whereas before, educational institutions were permitted to offer interim 11 measures, such as a revised class schedule or new housing assignment, to a student who had 12 complained of sexual harassment, now they are prohibited from issuing interim measures in a 13 manner that minimizes the burden for those students. The 2017 Title IX policy also relaxes 14 15 protections for sexual harassment victims, such as by permitting mediation between the parties, 16 even in cases of alleged sexual assault. 17 6. Underlying these changes and reversals are unfounded generalizations about women and 18 girls, particularly their credibility regarding reported experiences of sexual harassment, including 19 sexual violence. Myriad statements and actions by the Department’s leadership reveal this 20 discriminatory viewpoint. Thus, not only does the Department’s 2017 Title IX policy fail to meet 21 the reasoned decision and other requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, it also 22 23 violates the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee. Plaintiffs therefore respectfully 24 request that the 2017 Title IX policy be vacated. 25 1 See U.S. Dep’t of Educ., Ltr. from Ass’t Sec’y Candice Jackson (Sept. 22, 2017), 26 https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-title-ix-201709.pdf (“2017 Dear Colleague Letter”); U.S. Dep’t of Educ., Q&A on Campus Sexual Misconduct (Sept. 22, 2017), 27 https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-title-ix-201709.pdf (“2017 Q&A”). 28 Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief; Case No.: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Page: 4 Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 23 Filed 02/21/18 Page 5 of 45 1 Jurisdiction and Venue 2 7. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 3 8. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e) because Equal Rights Advocates, a plaintiff, 4 resides in San Francisco, California. 5 6 Intradistrict Assignment 7 9. Filing is proper in this Judicial District because Equal Rights Advocates, a plaintiff, is 8 located in San Francisco, California. 9 10 Parties 11 10. Plaintiff SurvJustice, Inc., (“SurvJustice”) is a national not-for-profit organization based 12 in Washington, D.C., founded in 2014. SurvJustice’s mission is to increase the prospect of 13 justice for survivors of sexual violence. It pursues this goal through legal assistance, policy 14 15 advocacy, and institutional training. Through its efforts, SurvJustice aims to decrease the 16 prevalence of sexual violence throughout the country. 17 11. SurvJustice provides legal assistance to survivors of sexual violence in campus 18 proceedings, as well as civil and criminal legal systems. The majority of requests for legal 19 assistance that SurvJustice receives are from students at institutions of higher education. 20 SurvJustice staff help sexual violence survivors navigate the campus grievance process, 21 including reporting the violence, assisting survivors throughout any investigation, advising 22 23 survivors in campus hearings, helping survivors with any appeals, and helping survivors access 24 accommodations and services from their educational institutions. They frequently serve as 25 “advisors of choice” for college students in institutional disciplinary actions for cases of alleged 26 domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, as provided for by the Clery Act 27 28 Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief; Case No.: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Page: 5 Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 23 Filed 02/21/18 Page 6 of 45 1 as amended by the 2013 Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, 20 U.S.C. § 2 1092(f)(8)(B)(iv)(II) (“Clery Act”). SurvJustice staff also represent survivors in civil litigation or 3 refer survivors to other qualified lawyers for such representation. SurvJustice also assists 4 survivors in reporting crimes to law enforcement, in advocating for prosecution, and by serving 5 as media representatives for victims and their families in high-profile criminal cases. 6 7 12. SurvJustice also trains educational institutions to prevent and address sexual violence 8 through compliance with federal law, enforcement of victims’ rights, and adoption of best 9 practices that include development of a culture that supports survivors and encourages “sexual 10 respect” (i.e., respect in sexual interactions and relationships).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Inside Trump's Stunning Upset Victory
    1/4/2017 Inside Trump’s Stunning Upset Victory - POLITICO Magazine AP Photo 2016 Inside Trump’s Stunning Upset Victory ‘Jesus, can we come back from this?’ the nominee asked as his numbers tanked. Because of Clinton, he did. By ALEX ISENSTADT, ELI STOKOLS, SHANE GOLDMACHER and KENNETH P. VOGEL | November 09, 2016 t was Friday afternoon, an hour after America heard Donald Trump bragging on tape I about sexually assaulting women, when Roger Stone’s phone rang. A secretary in Trump’s office had an urgent request: The GOP nominee wanted the political dark-arts operative to resend a confidential memo he had penned less than two weeks earlier. It was a one-page guide on Stone’s favorite line of attack against the Democratic nominee—how to savage Hillary Clinton for Bill Clinton’s history with other women. It was an issue, Stone wrote, that is “NOT about marital infidelity, adultery or ‘indiscretions.’” http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/donald-trump-wins-2016-214438 1/14 1/4/2017 Inside Trump’s Stunning Upset Victory - POLITICO Magazine It was also, however, a political third rail for most conventional candidates—a tactic that Republicans had tested and deemed a failure, and an approach so ugly that even the Clintons’ most vocal detractors urged Trump against. But the GOP nominee, recognizing his crude, abusive comments caught on an Access Hollywood tape as a potential campaign-ender, needed no convincing; he was insulted by the uproar, shocked at the double-standard he felt he was facing compared with Bill Clinton, and decided it was time to return fire.
    [Show full text]
  • 100 Days of Trump's America: a Timeline 18
    100 DAYS IN TRUMP'S AMERICA WHITE NATIONALISTS AND THEIR AGENDA INFILTRATE THE MAINSTREAM a report by the southern poverty law center © 2017 ABOUT THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER The Southern Poverty Law Center, based in Montgomery, Alabama, is a nonpartisan 501(c) (3) civil rights organization founded in 1971 and dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society. For more information about THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER visit www.splcenter.org 2 100 days in trump's america CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TAKES SHAPE 7 100 DAYS REPORT PROFILES 9 THE CONSPIRACY THEORIST-IN-CHIEF: TRUMP AND THE MAINSTREAMING OF THE RADICAL RIGHT 14 100 DAYS OF TRUMP'S AMERICA: A TIMELINE 18 HOW YOU CAN PARTICIPATE IN OUR DEMOCRACY 26 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 28 southern poverty law center 3 4 100 days in trump's america WHITE NATIONALISTS AND THEIR AGENDA INFILTRATE THE MAINSTREAM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As he spoke to the nation on Jan. 20, President Donald Trump reminded white nationalists why they had invested so much hope in him as their champion and redeemer. He painted a bleak picture of America: a nation of crumbling, third-world infrastructure, “rusted-out factories,” leaky borders, inner cities wallowing in pov- erty, a depleted military and a feckless political class that prospered as the country fell into ruin. He promised an “America First” policy that would turn it all around. “This American carnage stops right here and stops right now,” Trump declared. The inaugural address echoed the themes of a campaign that had electrified the white nationalist – or “alt-right” – movement with its promise to stop all Muslim travelers at the border and deport millions of undocumented immigrants – killers and “rapists,” Trump called them.
    [Show full text]
  • Third Amended Complaint; Case No.: 3:18-Cv-00535-JSC Page: 1 Case 3:18-Cv-00535-JSC Document 123 Filed 04/18/19 Page 2 of 52
    Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 123 Filed 04/18/19 Page 1 of 52 Jennifer A. Reisch (CA Bar No. 223671) 1 Equal Rights Advocates 2 1170 Market Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94102 3 Ph: (415) 621-0672 Fax: (415) 621-6744 4 Email: [email protected] 5 Javier M. Guzman* 6 Robin Thurston* Karianne Jones* 7 Democracy Forward Foundation 1333 H St. NW 8 Washington, DC 20005 Ph: (202) 448-9090 9 Fax: (202) 701-1775 10 Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 11 Leecia Welch (CA Bar No. 208741) 12 Seth Galanter* Alice Y. Abrokwa* 13 National Center for Youth Law 14 405 14th Street, 15th Floor Oakland, CA 94612, and 15 1313 L Street, NW, Suite 130 Washington, DC 20005 16 Ph: (510) 835-8098 17 Fax: (510) 835-8099 Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 18 Emily Martin* 19 Neena Chaudhry* Sunu Chandy* 20 National Women’s Law Center 21 11 Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 22 Ph: (202) 588-5180 Fax: (202) 588-5185 23 Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 24 *pro hac vice 25 Counsel for Plaintiffs 26 27 28 Third Amended Complaint; Case No.: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Page: 1 Case 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Document 123 Filed 04/18/19 Page 2 of 52 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 3 SURVJUSTICE, INC., ) 1015 15th Street NW, Suite 632 ) 4 Washington, DC 20005, ) ) 5 ) EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES ) 6 1170 Market Street, Suite 700 ) San Francisco, CA 94102, ) 7 ) VICTIM RIGHTS LAW CENTER ) 8 520 SW Yamhill Street ) ) Case Number: 3:18-cv-00535-JSC Portland, OR 97204, 9 ) ) 10 Plaintiffs, ) THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 11 v.
    [Show full text]
  • A Feminist Critical Policy Analysis of the Rollback of Title IX
    Journal of Critical Scholarship on Higher Education and Student Affairs Volume 3 Issue 3 Resilience, Resistance, & Reclamation: Article 5 Changing the Narrative of Higher Education October 2018 The Personal Is Still Political: A Feminist Critical Policy Analysis of the Rollback of Title IX Leslie Duadua Cabingabang University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/jcshesa Part of the Higher Education Commons Recommended Citation Cabingabang, L. D. (2018). The personal Is still political: A feminist critical policy analysis of the rollback of Title IX. Journal of Critical Scholarship on Higher Education and Student Affairs, 3(3), 38-47. This Conceptual Framework is brought to you for free and open access by Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Critical Scholarship on Higher Education and Student Affairs by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. The Personal Is Still Political: A Feminist Critical Policy Analysis of the Rollback of Title IX Cover Page Footnote Thank you, Dad, for a wealth that can never be stolen. This conceptual framework is available in Journal of Critical Scholarship on Higher Education and Student Affairs: https://ecommons.luc.edu/jcshesa/vol3/iss3/5 SPECIAL ISSUE OCTOBER 2018: Resilience, Resistance, & Reclamation The Personal is guidance was heralded as successful in bringing ways policies exclude women or proclaim neutrality, national attention to campus sexual violence, and essentially disenfranchising or denying women op- mobilized universities to update practices to address portunity, agency, or power (Biklen, Marshall & Pollard, Still Political: the issue (Collins, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Announcement
    Announcement Total 100 articles, created at 2016-09-15 18:01 1 NUJP to Duterte: Who really killed Jun Pala? Set the record straight. This was the call of the National Union of (2.03/3) the Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) on President Rodrigo Duterte, who earlier hinted that he knew who killed Davao City 2016-09-15 18:01 2KB newsinfo.inquirer.net 2 Matobato’s startling claims must be fully examined – Palace (1.03/3) MALACANANG on Thursday called for “sobriety and objectivity” after a witness made startling allegations in the Senate that President Duterte gave orders to bomb mosques and kill 2016-09-15 18:01 3KB newsinfo.inquirer.net 3 Flint pastor explains interrupting Trump as he 'veered from original plan' (1.02/3) "The statement began to go beyond what he originally said," Rev. Faith Green Timmons explained after she reprimanded Republican candidate Donald Trump as he began to give a political speech and criticize his opponent Hillary Clinton at a Flint, Mich., church on Sept... 2016-09-15 16:19 1KB www.washingtonpost.com 4 Ex-Speaker Nograles: Aides alive, not killed by Davao Death Squad Former House Speaker Prospero Nograles on Thursday denied (1.00/3) that any of his bodyguards were killed by the Davao Death Squad in 2010 when he ran for mayor against then winning candidate Rodrigo 2016-09-15 18:01 3KB newsinfo.inquirer.net 5 Mapua completes Final Four cast, thwarts St. Benilde (1.00/3) Mapua clinched the last Final Four seat in the NCAA Season 92 men's basketball tournament, repulsing St.
    [Show full text]
  • DA Jails Victims for Refusal to Testify, Report Says DA Jails Victims For
    Week of April 17 - April 23,, 2017 Providing ‘News that matters’ for years VVOOLL.. XXCCII NNOO.. 3311 Since 1925 9w1 ww.louisianaweekly.com 50 cents Dept. of Education pick to head its Civil Rights office once said she faced discrimination for being white By Annie Waldman Candice Jackson “gravitated” toward a Stanford Review . “We need to allow each Department’s most important — and con - ProPublica section of the class that provided students person to define his or her own achieve - troversial — branches in a different direc - with extra help on challenging problems, ments instead of assuming competence or tion than her predecessors. A longtime The new acting head of the U.S. she wrote in a student publication. Then incompetence based on race.” anti-Clinton activist and an outspoken Department of Education’s Office for Civil she learned that the section was reserved Although her limited background in civil conservative-turned-libertarian, she has Rights once complained that she experi - for minority students. rights law makes it difficult to infer her denounced feminism and race-based pref - enced discrimination because she is white. “I am especially disappointed that the positions on specific issues, Jackson’s erences. She’s also written favorably As an undergraduate studying calculus at University encourages these and other dis - writings during and after college suggest Stanford University in the mid-1990s, criminatory programs,” she wrote in the she’s likely to steer one of the Education Continued on Pg. 13 JACKSON DDAA jjaaiillss vviiccttiimmss Previous road- rage incident to ffoorr rreeffuussaall factor into ttoo tteessttiiffyy,, Joe McKnight murder trial rreeppoorrtt ssaayyss A previous road-rage incident involving the man who By Della Hasselle, Contributing Writer fatally shot NFL player Joe McKnight on Dec.
    [Show full text]
  • Ivanka Trump's Report Card on Women's and Working Families
    Ivanka Trump’s Report Card on Women’s and Working Families’ Issues Is Her Performance Living Up to Her Promises? By Kaitlin Holmes, Shilpa Phadke, Jocelyn Frye, Laura Durso, Kate Bahn, Jamila Taylor, Katie Hamm One year ago, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump announced his intentions to add new policies on paid family leave and child care to his official platform.1 These proposals reportedly were largely influenced by his daughter, Ivanka Trump, who actively campaigned to frame her father as a feminist and to pitch herself as a champion for working women and families.2 Today, with her father in the White House, Ivanka Trump holds an official role as advisor to the president, with an apparent portfolio that includes women’s empowerment, women’s entrepreneurship, and issues affecting working families.3 She has also been touted as having a broader, more wide-ranging, and largely undefined role, which has placed her at the table with foreign dignitaries, business CEOs, and lawmakers. Her very visible presence in these varied settings has often put her at the center of the story, enhanced by a public narrative that depicts her as the moderating influence working behind the scenes in the White House, with immeasurable resources at her fingertips. But, too often what has been missing from the conversation is a real-world understand- ing of women’s lives, their everyday experiences, and the challenges they face. Ivanka Trump’s sporadic forays into discussions about her issue priorities, more often than not, have been largely rhetorical with few details and little concrete analysis of the economic, racial, gender, ethnic, geographic, and other differences that can influence policy needs and outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Threshold for the Requirement to Collect, Retain, and Transmit Information on Funds Transfers and Transmittals of Funds That
    Washington, DC December 23, 2020 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Docket No. R-1726; RIN 7100-AF97 Docket No. FINCEN-2020-0002 ; RIN 1506-AB41 SUBJECT: Threshold for the Requirement to Collect, Retain, and Transmit Information on Funds Transfers and Transmittals of Funds That Begin or End Outside the United States, and Clarification of the Requirement to Collect, Retain, and Transmit Information on Transactions Involving Convertible Virtual Currencies and Digital Assets with Legal Tender Status AGENCIES: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”); Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), Treasury. ACTION: Comment on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. We understand that “The Board and FinCEN (collectively, the “Agencies”) are issuing this proposed rule to modify the threshold in the rule implementing the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) requiring financial institutions to collect and retain information on certain funds transfers and transmittals of funds. The proposed modification would reduce this threshold from $3,000 to $250 for funds transfers and transmittals of funds that begin or end outside the United States. FinCEN is likewise proposing to reduce from $3,000 to $250 the threshold in the rule requiring financial institutions to transmit to other financial institutions in the payment chain information on funds transfers and transmittals of funds that begin or end outside the United States.” Significant Concern While we provide comments below, we note that some question the legitimacy of this regulatory effort. As an agency headed by a person appointed by an impeached president who may have conspired with foreign interests, some believe any regulatory proposals put forward are invalid. Further, some claim that this administration is directly responsible, via incompetence, misdirection, and simple falsification (lying)1, for the deaths (eventually) of over 500,000 of its citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Sexual Harassment Policies at U.S. Colleges: from Repeal of the 2011 Doe- Ocr Guidelines to Launch of the #Metoo Movement on Social Media
    THE FUTURE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICIES AT U.S. COLLEGES: FROM REPEAL OF THE 2011 DOE- OCR GUIDELINES TO LAUNCH OF THE #METOO MOVEMENT ON SOCIAL MEDIA Marc Edelman* On September 22, 2017, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (“DOE-OCR”), under the leadership of U.S. President Donald Trump, repealed the previous administration’s sexual harassment prevention guidelines that had required colleges to appoint a Title IX compliance officer and prosecute sexual harassment claims under a “preponderance of the evidence” standard (the “2011 Guidelines”).1 Although some college administrators have praised the DOE-OCR’s efforts to overturn the 2011 Guidelines,2 others have described the Trump administration’s repeal as “a disgrace and a disservice to everyone who has worked to address sexual violence.”3 Opponents of the repeal, in particular, have pointed to U.S. President Donald Trump’s own history of alleged sexual harassment and the burgeoning #MeToo social media * Professor Marc Edelman ([email protected]) is a tenured Professor of Law at the Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, City University of New York, where he writes regularly on issues involving sports and education law. He is also an adjunct professor at Fordham University School of Law and a columnist for Forbes SportsMoney. © Marc Edelman, 2018. 1. Lauren Camera, Trump Administration Rescinds Obama-Era Campus Sexual Assault Guidance, US NEWS (Sept. 22, 2017, 11:40 AM), https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-09-22/trump- administration-rescinds-obama-era-campus-sexual-assault-guidance. See also Kimberly Hefling & Caitlin Emma, Obama-Era School Sexual Assault Policy Rescinded, POLITICO (Sept.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Was Bill Clinton's Real Father?
    In HILLARY (And Bill): The SEX Volume—Part One of the Clinton Trilogy, Bill and Hillary's meteoric rise to success is chronicled. It's a carefully plotted path that eventually led them to the White House. But along the way, a series of compromises had to be made, including a prearranged marriage, clandestine assignments for the CIA, and Hillary's ultimate role as a "fixer" for her husband's many dalliances. Pulling no punches, investigative journalist Victor Thorn paints a compelling portrait of secrecy, deceit, violence, and betrayal that shatters the myth Mrs. Clinton has spent so many years trying to create. This three-book series is the most comprehensive examination of the Clinton marriage ever compiled, with Hillary (And Bill): The Sex Volume laying a riveting foundation for the next two books which follow: Part Two - Hillary (and Bill): The Drugs Volume and then Part Three - Hillary (And Bill): The Murder Volume. "In his book Hillary (And Bill): The Sex Volume, Investigative Reporter Victor Thorn digs deeply through the myriad layers of propaganda dissemi- nated by the Clinton camp and exposes the candid and shocking facts about America's most powerful woman. Thorn deftly weaves a tapestry of truth to reveal the loathsome cultivation of a future president, proven through exhaustive and well-sourced research. Mark the advent of this imperative resource and know that you'Ve been warned...." — Frank Whalen, Talk Show Host, "Frankly Speaking Radio" "Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life." —BRADFORD DELONG, deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury during the first Clinton administration TABLE OF CONTENTS: HILLARY (AND BILL) Preface: The Rape of Juanita Broaddrick ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Student Survivors' Interests and the Mathews Analysis Sage Carson
    \\jciprod01\productn\H\HLG\43-2\HLG204.txt unknown Seq: 1 23-JUN-20 16:26 BALANCING THE SCALES: STUDENT SURVIVORS’ INTERESTS AND THE MATHEWS ANALYSIS SAGE CARSON1 AND SARAH NESBITT2 In response to activism by student survivors of sexual violence begin- ning in the early 2010s, respondents—those students named as abusers and harassers in sexual misconduct cases—and their advocates have recently turned to the courts. To date, respondents have filed over 500 due process claims to challenge the fairness of their schools’ sexual misconduct discipli- nary proceedings. Courts assessing these due process claims apply the Ma- thews v. Eldridge balancing test, the governing procedural due process framework. The Mathews balancing test instructs courts to weigh: 1) the private interests at stake; 2) the risk of erroneous deprivation using current procedures; and 3) the public interests at stake. The underlying facts in Ma- thews concerned two parties—the party facing a deprivation and the charging institution. But Mathews did not contemplate the structure of cases where one student has allegedly harmed another, meaning there is an additional party to consider: a complaining student. Sexual misconduct cases, like other harassment, discrimination, and violence cases, have this unique three-party structure. By applying the Mathews balancing test—a due process frame- work built on a two-party case—to what are in fact three-party cases, courts fail to adequately account for all of the interests at stake. As a result, student survivors have been pushed off the scales of justice when courts consider what process is due to student respondents.
    [Show full text]
  • Complaint for Injunctive Relief; Case No.: Page: 1 Case 3:18-Cv-00535 Document 1 Filed 01/25/18 Page 2 of 41
    Case 3:18-cv-00535 Document 1 Filed 01/25/18 Page 1 of 41 1 Jennifer A. Reisch (CA Bar No. 223671) Equal Rights Advocates 2 1170 Market Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94102 3 Ph: (415) 896-0672 4 Fax: (415) 231-0011 Emails: [email protected] 5 Javier M. Guzman* 6 Skye L. Perryman* Robin Thurston* 7 Karianne Jones* 8 Democracy Forward Foundation 1333 H St. NW 9 Washington, DC 20005 Ph: (202) 448-9090 10 Fax: (202) 701-1775 11 Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 12 Leecia Welch (CA Bar No. 208741) 13 Alice Y. Abrokwa* National Center for Youth Law 14 405 14th Street, 15th Floor 15 Oakland, CA 94612, and 1313 L Street, NW, Suite 130 16 Washington, DC 20005 Ph: (510) 835-8098 17 Fax: (510) 835-8099 Emails: [email protected], [email protected] 18 19 Emily Martin* Neena Chaudhry* 20 Sunu Chandy* Alexandra Brodsky* 21 National Women’s Law Center 11 Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 800 22 Washington, DC 20036 23 Ph: (202) 588-5180 Fax: (202) 588-5185 24 Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 25 *pro hac vice motions forthcoming 26 27 Counsel for Plaintiffs 28 Complaint for Injunctive Relief; Case No.: Page: 1 Case 3:18-cv-00535 Document 1 Filed 01/25/18 Page 2 of 41 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 3 SURVJUSTICE, INC., ) ) 4 1015 15th Street NW, Suite 632 Washington, DC 20005, ) ) 5 ) EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES ) 6 1170 Market Street, Suite 700 ) San Francisco, CA 94102, ) 7 ) ) 8 VICTIM RIGHTS LAW CENTER 520 SW Yamhill Street ) Portland, OR 97204, ) Case Number: 9 ) ) 10 Plaintiffs, ) ) 11 v.
    [Show full text]