Author: Edward Bartlett

Categories
False Allegations

International Falsely Accused Day: Report from England

INTERNATIONAL FALSLEY ACCUSED DAY: REPORT FROM ENGLAND

By Lyn Crabtree

September 11, 2024

As founder of Falsely Accused Day — now International — I’m proud to report we had a rather successful day here in England on September 9.

Where I was in Liverpool outside His Majesty’s Prison, our numbers this year were somewhat smaller, naturally people find weekdays to attend more difficult due to work commitments. However, the fantastic support from passing vehicles was at some points overwhelming, as we tried to speak huge blasts of horns were battled with. The message however was still heard loud and clear.

Passing prison officers even took some interest in our displays once again we had our faceless victim masks with us. These always bring tears to my eyes seeing the sea of masks of those who were not heard in UK courts and have lost their lives to false allegations.

Amongst our display we had our Snowdrops. We are of course continuing our Snowdrop Campaign, and yes, we will eventually complete our mammoth task of getting out the message to all those who contribute to False allegations like the police, courts etc…

We had no official speakers in Liverpool, just Jo Wheeler and myself. This gave us more time to engage with those who were either falsely accused themselves or supporting someone who is. It was daunting to hear some of their stories. So much of each case having many similarities, one wonders how these stories can even be believed by the police to start with. ‘Believe the victim’ being a huge part and no evidence but the words of a liar!

We were pleased to welcome supporters for Lucy Letby. I’m sure this horrendous story will have been prominent in the media for you all. Lucy aged 34 who was a neonatal nurse was accused of killing seven babies and damaging a further seven.

Many are supporting Lucy to have a fair trial. I hope she does have that opportunity, because after seeing the way our trial went and listening to others about their experiences, it seems that getting a fair trial is what those falsely accused suffer the most.

I was able to read the following poem that I had sent out to prisoners in the UK who are wrongly convicted….

International Falsely Accused Day

We’re into our 4th Year,

So we really want to say,

Let’s gather to make this incredible,

For our 4th International Falsely Accused Day,

The fight will go on forever,

Until changes are made in the law,

‘Believe the victim’ mantra,

Is that HUGE major flaw,

As you sit and read my words,

Remember we fight for the Falsely Accused every day,

By letter, email, and social media,

You’re in our thoughts and hearts – One day ‘THEY’ will pay!

I was appalled to hear that some prisoners were denied having the support letter and poem. I was sad that they would think they were forgotten this year.

I also told a real story of a man who having being bullied all his life ended up being falsely accused as being a danger to children. He was not convicted as no one actually made an official complaint to authorities, and he to this day has been so badly affected by these terrible rumours that he can not leave the house. How awful that some people are affected so much by False Accusations that it literally wrecks their lives.

Partway through our demonstration, we had a very welcome visit from LBC radio. The spoke to Jo Wheeler and I. Jo certainly had lots to say  as she was being interviewed. The reporter chatted to a few others and proceeded to take film footage of us and our displays. I am not sure of when this maybe aired but we felt positive that we will be heard by many as the false allegation message reaches far and wide, because we all know, False Allegations are Not rare!

London Observance

In contrast to Liverpool, London had the following speakers:

  • Margaret Gardner, who heads the support group, Falsely Accused Support Organization (FASO)
  • Brian Hudson, from FACT
  • Dr. Kevin Felstead, author of Memory and Injustice
  • William Merrit, author and investigator for the book about Rolf Harris’s innocence
  • Jonathan King, Ex-TV personality and DJ
  • Sean B W Parker, on behalf of Dr. Michael Naughton
  • Brian Buckle, who was falsely accused of rape, after a very expensive appeal and 5 years behind bars is finally free.

A successful day was had by all and the speakers were well received. Buckle’s speech brought tears to the eyes of some onlookers as his family who fought tirelessly for his innocence stood by him.

Conclusion

To close, I’d like to express my delight at seeing so much activity on social media about events for IFAD from the USA, Argentina, Spain, India, and of course the UK.

So now we move on to our next step which is Men’s Equality Month.

Categories
Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Gender Agenda Gender Identity Office for Civil Rights Title IX

Democratic-Appointed Judges Highly Critical of New Title IX Regulation

PRESS RELEASE

Robert Thompson: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Democratic-Appointed Judges Highly Critical of New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / August 27, 2024 – On April 19, the U.S. Department of Education issued its long-awaited Title IX regulation (1). Media accounts have generally classified supporters of the rule as “liberal,” while opponents of the policy categorized as “conservative.” (2) But subsequent judicial rulings have cast doubt on this convenient stereotype.

Over the last three months, 10 lawsuits have been filed against the controversial policy. In response, circuit courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court have handed down a total of 12 decisions. Eleven out of the 12 opinions have imposed a temporary injunction on the rule. (3)

One of the most unexpected aspects of the decisions is the fact that many judges appointed by Democratic lawmakers have been highly critical of the policy. This fact is revealed in two decisions: the August 16 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, three of whose members were named by Democratic presidents; and the July 24 decision by District Court Judge Rodney Sippel, nominated by President Bill Clinton in 1997:

Supreme Court: In their August 16 decision, Justice Sotomayor, with the concurrence of Justices Kagan and Jackson (along with Justice Gorsuch, nominated by a Republican president) authored this stunning rebuke of the Department of Education document (4):

“Every Member of the Court agrees respondents are entitled to interim relief as to three provisions of that Rule: 34 CFR §106.10 (2023) (defining sex discrimination), §106.31(a)(2) (prohibiting schools from preventing individuals from accessing certain sex-separated spaces consistent with their gender identity), and §106.2’s definition of hostile environment harassment.”

Their statement expressed a categorical disapproval of the new regulation’s plan to:

  1. Redefine sex to include “gender identity.”
  2. Allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms designated for members of the opposite sex.
  3. Create a new definition of “hostile environment harassment” which would have the effect of chilling free speech and negating Supreme Court precedent.

Circuit Court Judge Sippel:  On May 7, the states of Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota filed their complaint against the Department of Education (5).  Eleven weeks later, Judge Rodney Sippel of the Eastern District of Missouri issued his opinion. His 56-page decision expressed concerns about the same three issues enumerated by the Supreme Court, but went far beyond that. The Sippel ruling also expressed doubts about:

  • Irreparable Injury: “The loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.”
  • Overly Broad Scope: “Damages are not available for simple acts of teasing and name-calling among school children, however, even where these comments target differences in gender.”
  • Spending Clause: “Since Title IX was enacted pursuant to Congress’s authority under the Spending Clause of the Constitution…the Supreme Court ‘insists that Congress speak with a clear voice’ when imposing conditions on the receipt of federal funds,”
  • Statutory Authority: Judge Sippel rebuked the Department of Education for exceeding its “statutory authority” a total of 10 times in his decision.
  • Arbitrary and Capricious: The Judge repeatedly criticized the Title IX regulation for being “arbitrary and capricious.”

At the end, Democratic-appointed Judge Sippel penned this stunning conclusion: “After due consideration of all the foregoing authorities in light of the aforementioned differences between the two statutes, Bostock’s express disavowal to bathrooms or locker rooms or other statutory schemes, and in the absence of controlling authority, the Court concludes that plaintiffs have met their preliminary burden of demonstrating a fair chance of prevailing on their argument that Bostock should not apply to Title IX, and that the Department exceeded its statutory authority and/or acted contrary to law in redefining ‘on the basis of sex’ for purposes of Title IX.”

Following the 12 decisions, the Title IX policy has been frozen in the 26 states of LA, MS, MT, ID, TN, KY, OH, IN, VA, WV, KS, AK, UT, WY, TX, AR, MO, OA, NE, ND, SD, AL, FL, GA, SC, and OK, as well as in thousands of schools in 45 states attended by children of Moms for Liberty members and by members of the Young America’s Foundation (6).

Given the bipartisan legal and public (7) opposition to the Title IX regulation, and given its high implementation costs, governors and school superintendents in the remaining 24 states should consider instructing their schools to not implement the moribund Title IX regulation.

Links:

  1. https://titleixforall.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Unofficial-version-of-the-final-regulations.pdf
  2. https://www.k12dive.com/news/title-ix-final-rule-reaction-opponents-supporters/714560/
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  4. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/24a78_f2ah.pdf
  5. https://arkansasag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024-05-07-Arkansas-v.-US-Dept-of-Education-Filemarked.pdf
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/02/public-opinion-polls-reveal-growing-public-opposition-to-policies-driven-by-gender-agenda/
Categories
Department of Education Due Process Gender Agenda Gender Identity Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Unanimous: Supreme Court Justices Voice Opposition to Three Major Title IX Provisions

PRESS RELEASE

Robert Thompson: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Unanimous: Supreme Court Justices Voice Opposition to Three Major Title IX Provisions

WASHINGTON / August 22, 2024 – In a stunning move, all nine Supreme Court justices expressed their opposition to three key provisions in the new Title IX regulation (1). In its August 16 decision in support of the appellate court rulings to block enforcement of the new rule, the nine Justices expressed their unanimous disapproval of the new regulation’s plan to:

  1. Redefine sex to include “gender identity.”
  2. Allow transgender students to use the bathrooms and locker rooms designated for members of the opposite sex.
  3. Create a new, overly broad definition of “hostile environment harassment” (the Title IX regulation brazenly seeks to negate the Supreme Court’s definition of “sexual harassment,” as delineated in its landmark Davis v. Monroe decision (2)).

The SCOTUS decision affirmatively states, “Every Member of the Court agrees respondents are entitled to interim relief as to three provisions of that Rule: 34 CFR §106.10 (2023) (defining sex discrimination), §106.31(a)(2) (prohibiting schools from preventing individuals from accessing certain sex-separated spaces consistent with their gender identity), and §106.2’s definition of hostile environment harassment.”

The opinion comes on the heels of a string of defeats for the Biden Administration’s effort to revamp the Title IX law, enacted in 1972 to ban sex discrimination in schools. Prior to the Supreme Court ruling, the Biden Administration had lost in 7 out of 8 district court decisions, and lost in 3 out of 3 appellate court opinions (3).

As a result, the Title IX policy has been blocked in the states of LA, MS, MT, ID, TN, KY, OH, IN, VA, WV, KS, AK, UT, WY, TX, AR, MO, OA, NE, ND, SD, AL, FL, GA, SC, and OK, as well as in thousands of schools in 45 states attended by children of Moms for Liberty members and by members of the Young America’s Foundation (4). As a result, the 2020 Title IX regulation still remains in effect for those states and schools.

In recent months, the tide has turned against Marxist-inspired transgender ideology. These developments include growing scientific skepticism, opposition in public opinion polls, state-level laws (5), and hostility expressed by political candidates (6).

In addition, SAVE recently established a Citizen Watchdog program to monitor school compliance with the recent judicial Title IX decisions (7).

The Supreme Court decision applies only to the preliminary injunctions against the Title IX regulations, so its August 16 ruling will not be the last word on the subject. But the unanimity of opposition to three key regulatory provisions lends credence to critics of the controversial policy.

In the words of commentator Aaron Flanigan, “Whether or not they realize it now, American parents are standing on the precipice of one of the most far-reaching, extremist, and dangerous transformations of the education system in American history.” (8)

Links:

  1. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/24a78_f2ah.pdf
  2. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1998/97-843
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  4. https://www.scag.gov/media/pskl4phx/ks-v-u-s-dept-of-education-list-of-schools-enjoined.pdf
  5. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/08/states-pass-new-laws-to-block-the-marxist-inspired-gender-agenda/
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/07/schools-urged-to-delay-implementation-of-title-ix-rule-until-legal-challenges-are-resolved/
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/
  8. https://amac.us/newsline/education/the-new-biden-harris-rule-that-could-upend-the-election/?utm_objective=website_traffic&utm_source=website&utm_campaign=real_clear_politics&utm_medium=shared_content&utm_content=tnb082024
Categories
Uncategorized

States Pass New Laws to Block the Marxist-Inspired ‘Gender Agenda’

PRESS RELEASE

Robert D. Thompson: 301-801-0608
States Pass New Laws to Block the Marxist-Inspired ‘Gender Agenda’
WASHINGTON / August 19, 2024 – The “Gender Agenda” refers to a Marxist-Inspired effort to re-educate the nation’s youth to believe that one’s sex is fluid and non-binary.  In the words of Shulamith Firestone, ‘the goal of the 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.” (1)

 

In response, numerous states have enacted new laws designed to protect women’s sports (2), safeguard parental rights (3), ban pronoun mandates (4), and stop gender transitioning of underage youth (5)

During the recent 2024 legislative sessions, the following 11 laws were enacted to thwart the Gender Agenda:

Women’s Sports:
  •  Ohio House Bill 68 – a bill that prevents transgender athletes from playing women’s sports. (6)
  • New Hampshire HB 1205 – a bill protecting participation on female K-12 sports teams based on sex. (7)
Parental Rights:
  • Tennessee SB 2749 – ‘Families’ Rights and Responsibilities Act,’ which establishes that “[t]he liberty of a parent to the care, custody, and control of the parent’s child, including the right to direct the upbringing, education, health care, and mental health of the child, is a fundamental right.” (8)
Bans on Pronoun Mandates:
 
  • Louisiana House Bill 121 prohibits the use of transgender and nonbinary youths’ chosen names and pronouns in K-12 public schools without parental permission. (9)
  • Tennessee SB 1810 – a bill that requires schools to alert parents if their child has requested to go by a name, or set of pronouns, that differs from their school forms. (10)
  • Idaho House Bill 538, bars teachers from referring to a student by a name or pronoun that doesn’t align with their birth sex, unless parents’ consent. It also broadly enacts protections for public employees, including teachers, who are unwilling to use someone’s preferred name and pronouns. (11)
Stop Gender Transitioning of Underage Youth:
  • Idaho House Bill 668, a bill banning the use of public funding to cover sex-change procedures. (12)
  • Ohio House Bill 68, a bill which blocks gender-affirming care for trans youth. (13)
  • Wyoming bill SF0099, a Children gender change prohibition bill which bans physicians from performing procedures for children related to gender transitioning and gender reassignment. (14)
  •  South Carolina bill H4624 places a ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors. The law also bars health professionals from performing gender-transition surgeries, prescribing puberty blockers and overseeing hormone treatments for patients under 18. (15)
  • New Hampshire HB 619 – a bill that “ensures that life-altering, irreversible surgeries will not be performed on children.” (16)
At the national level, the Department of Education issued a Title IX regulation in April that redefines sex to include “gender identity”. In response, 10 lawsuits have been filed in various states to stop the new policy. To date, temporary injunctions have been issued that block the implementation of the regulation in 26 states. (17)

 

In addition, SAVE has launched a Citizen Watchdog program designed to engage citizens in local grassroots efforts to monitor school activities. (18)

In support of these developments, SAVE is inviting candidates for political office to sign the “Candidate Pledge to Protect Schools, Children, and Families from the Federal Title IX Plan.”

The Candidate Pledge can be viewed online. (19) To date, 108 lawmakers from 27 states have signed the statement. (20) Candidates can indicate their support for the Pledge by sending a confirmatory email to: rthompson@saveservices.org

Links:

Categories
Uncategorized

‘Rapist:’ Historic Lawsuit Against Yale University May Strengthen Defamation Claims Against False Accusers

PRESS RELEASE
 
Robert D. Thompson: 301-801-0608
Email: info@saveservices.org
‘Rapist:’ Historic Lawsuit Against Yale University May Strengthen Defamation Claims Against False Accusers

WASHINGTON / August 14, 2024 – False allegations have become a major problem in the United States (1).  A national survey revealed that 10% of Americans report they have been falsely accused of abuse. The representative survey found 13% of males and 8% of females had been targeted by a false allegation of domestic abuse during their lifetimes. (2)

In 2015, Yale University student Saifullah Khan was accused of rape by Jane Doe. News of the accusation became public knowledge, triggering fevered calls for his immediate removal from the campus. The case was then brought to criminal court, where he was eventually acquitted of sexual assault.

But inexplicably, Khan was later found responsible for sexual misconduct under Yale’s flawed Title IX proceedings. The man was expelled from Yale in 2019. These contradictory decisions prompted him to sue both Yale and Jane Doe for $110 million for wrongful defamation. (3)

Typically, witnesses in criminal cases are afforded immunity from defamation lawsuits over what they say during the proceedings. But the Connecticut Supreme Court determined that Yale’s campus disciplinary process did not offer the same protections as a criminal process, that it was not “quasi-judicial.” (4) So the Court allowed Khan to move forward with his defamation complaint against Jane Doe.

In addition to his lawsuit against Yale and false accuser Doe, Khan filed another defamation complaint in May 2024. He is suing attorney Jennifer Becker and 15 advocacy organizations concerning their amicus brief to the Connecticut Supreme Court that labeled him a “rapist,” even though he had already been cleared of the heinous charges in a criminal court. His lawsuit charged the groups with “defamation, false light, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and abuse of process action.” (5) The damage to his good name and reputation had been done, and the harmful amicus brief still remains on the Internet. (6)

Feminist activists apparently believe they should be able to make accusations of “rape” or “sexual assault” in bad faith and not face legal consequences, even after the accused person is found innocent in a court of law. Defamation lawsuits are one of our nation’s strongest protections against false allegations of a heinous crime.

The outcome of the Connecticut lawsuits will be closely watched by criminal defense attorneys and falsely accused persons around the country.

Links:

1)    https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/false-accusations-and-abuse-claims.html

 2)    https://endtodv.org/2023/02/27/survey-one-in-10-falsely-accused-of-abuse-women-usually-the-accusers-men-most-often-the-targets/

3)     https://www.chronicle.com/article/talking-about-campus-sexual-assault-could-get-you-in-trouble-a-long-running-legal-fight-shows-how

4)      https://www.chronicle.com/article/2-former-students-face-defamation-lawsuits-for-talking-about-sexual-assault

5)    https://www.thecollegefix.com/acquitted-former-student-sues-15-groups-for-defamation-after-they-called-him-a-rapist/

6)      https://www.chronicle.com/article/talking-about-campus-sexual-assault-could-get-you-in-trouble-a-long-running-legal-fight-shows-how

Categories
Uncategorized

SAVE Invites Persons to Become Local Watchdogs to Assure Title IX Compliance

PRESS RELEASE

Robert D. Thompson: 301-801-0608

SAVE Invites Persons to Become Local Watchdogs to Assure Title IX Compliance

WASHINGTON / August 5, 2024 – Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE) today is announcing a new Citizen Watchdog initiative to assure Title IX compliance in 26 states in which judges have ruled against the Biden Administration’s controversial Title IX regulation, and to push back against the Gender Agenda in the other 24 states. (1) 

Over the last two months, federal judges issued a series of strongly worded rulings that blocked the implementation of the Title IX regulation, which redefines sex to include “gender identity.” The judicial decisions currently apply to 26 states around the country: LA, MS, MT, ID, TN, KY, OH, IN, VA, WV, KS, AK, UT, WY, TX. AR, MO, IA, NE, ND, SD, AL, OK, FL, GA and SC. (2) 

In addition, the Kansas ruling exempts over 2,000 schools from the Title IX regulation. (3)  Here is the list of Schools. (4)

On August 1, 2024, the controversial Title IX regulation went into effect in the 24 states not covered by the judicial decisions.  The Department of Education released a statement claiming the new regulation is designed to “ensure that Title IX promotes educational equity and opportunity for all.”  This statement is disingenuous because the new regulation actually serves to remove fundamental civil rights from women competing in athletic events, from students who wish to exercise their free speech rights, and from falsely accused male students who expect to enjoy 14th Amendment due process protections.

While the injunctions handed down against the Title IX rule have been encouraging, some schools are expected to attempt to sidestep the decisions. For example, schools in the 26 states may claim to be following the letter of the law, but individual teachers or counselors may continue their efforts to indoctrinate vulnerable students into Gender Ideology, while school administrators turn a blind eye.

A recent report from the Heritage Foundation reveals that schools in over 1,000 districts are allowed to hide a child’s gender identity from the child’s parents. (5) 

Aaron Lacey, a partner at Thompson Coburn, recently claimed said institutions affected by the injunctions could choose to adopt only certain elements of the new Title IX rule, as long as they remain in compliance with the 2020 Title IX regulation – an approach that could be described as a “disruptive nightmare.” (6) 

In response, SAVE is in the process of identifying hundreds of Citizen Watchdogs around the country who are willing to monitor their schools to assure compliance with the judicial decisions and counter the Gender Agenda. (7) 

If a Citizen Watchdog discovers non-compliance in their local school(s), they should take steps to stop the problem. These approaches include:

  1. Meet with the school principal and/or education superintendent
  2. Speak out at meetings of the local school board
  3. Refer the non-compliance to the state Attorney General office.    

To volunteer for the Watchdog program, persons should send a message to Watchdog@saveservices.org. Please indicate your city and state, and your area of concern, such as women’s sports, due process, etc. To learn about the Citizen Watchdog program, visit: https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/  

The Title IX Network consists of 233 organizational members who are working to stop the new Title IX regulation and end the gender agenda.

Links:

1    https://www.saveservices.org/2022-Policy/
2.   https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
3.   https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/KansasStateofetalvUnitedStatesDepartmentofEducationetalDocketNo52?doc_id=X7VSH1UVO6B9K1AAI088P6TS9IF
4.  Following is the list of Schools: https://www.scag.gov/media/pskl4phx/ks-v-u-s-dept-of-education-list-of-schools-enjoined.pdf
5.   https://www.heritage.org/gender/report/public-school-gender-policies-exclude-parents-are-unconstitutional
6.   https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/2024/07/17/title-ix-rule-hold-more-670-colleges
7.   https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/

 

Categories
Gender Agenda Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Schools Urged to Delay Implementation of Title IX Rule Until Legal Challenges are Resolved

PRESS RELEASE

Robert Thompson: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Schools Urged to Delay Implementation of Title IX Rule Until Legal Challenges are Resolved

WASHINGTON / July 29, 2024 – The Department of Education issued its long-awaited Title IX rule on April 19, with an effective date of August 1. (1) The regulation was immediately challenged by numerous groups. Given that the lawsuits and other challenges will not be resolved by August 1, SAVE urges all schools receiving federal assistance to defer implementation of the sweeping policy.

Following is a summary of the lawsuits against the Title IX regulation:

Litigation: To date, 10 lawsuits have been filed by state Attorneys General and other groups. In six of those complaints, judges have issued decisions. In every case, the judge imposed a temporary injunction on the rule, citing the “arbitrary and capricious” nature of the regulation. Currently, bans on the regulation are in place in 21 states: LA, MS, MT, ID, TN, KY, OH, IN, VA, WV, KS, AK, UT, WY, TX. AR, MO, IA, NE, ND, and SD (2).

Appellate Decisions: Earlier this month, the Court of Appeals for both the Fifth Circuit (3) and the Sixth Circuit (4) denied appeals of the Department of Education to stay the decisions of the trial courts.

Nationwide Injunction: In his July 11 ruling for Texas, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk noted he is considering extending his injunction to cover all 50 states in the nation (5).

Other state-level efforts are underway to overturn the regulation:

Candidate Opposition: Over 100 state political candidates around the country have signed a pledge to oppose the changes contemplated under the new Title IX regulation (6).

Statutes: To date, numerous states have enacted legislation that contradict key provisions of the Title IX regulation (7). For example, 13 states have passed laws designed to assure due process on college campuses (8).

Directives: Numerous governors and state superintendents of education have instructed their schools to disregard the rule (9).

Other efforts to eliminate the Title IX regulation include:

Title IX Network: A coalition of 232 organizations has been working for two years to oppose the regulation at the local, state, and national levels (10).

Congressional Review Act: Resolutions to block the regulation have been introduced in both the U.S. Senate (11) and House (12). On July 11, the Resolution passed in the House of Representatives.

New Presidential Administration: On January 20, 2025 a new person will be sworn in as the 46th president of the United States. Donald Trump is currently leading Kamala Harris in the Electoral College, 312 to 226. (13) If elected, Trump has promised that “on day one,” he will terminate the Biden mandate (14).

Never before in history has the Judicial Branch, Legislative Branch, and the American public coalesced in such a coordinated and sustained manner to oppose a controversial federal regulation. Schools that receive federal education monies are urged to postpone all implementation of the regulation until the legal issues are resolved.

If the Department of Education attempts to enforce the new policy, the affected school or individual should seek an injunction which, based on the many judicial decisions issued to date, likely would be granted. Schools should not waste resources on the futility of implementing a deeply unpopular Title IX regulation.

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.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  3. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.219883/gov.uscourts.ca5.219883.73.1.pdf
  4. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca6.151770/gov.uscourts.ca6.151770.41.0.pdf
  5. https://www.newsweek.com/transgender-policy-texas-schools-donald-trump-kacsmaryk-title-ix-1924387
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/lawmakers/pledge/
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/
  8. https://www.saveservices.org/title-ix-regulation/state-laws/
  9. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/04/do-not-comply-fight-americans-revolt-against-new-title-ix-rule/
  10. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-Policy/
  11. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/96?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22%5C%22S.+J.+Res+96%5C%22%22%7D&s=3&r=1
  12. 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
  13. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/
  14. https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/4656405-donald-trump-transgender-students-athletes-title-ix-lgbtq/
Categories
Uncategorized

Continued String of Legal Victories Over Deceptive Title IX Rule

PRESS RELEASE
 
 
Robert D. Thompson: 301-801-0608
 

Continued String of Legal Victories Over Deceptive Title IX Rule 

WASHINGTON / July 24, 2024 – On April 19 of this year, the Biden Department of Education issued its final Title IX rule that expanded the meaning of sex to include “gender identity.” (1) While the new regulation promised to bring new protections to LGBTQ students, in fact it infringed on parental rights, eviscerated fairness from female athletics, violated Congressional prerogatives, and sidelined constitutional due process guarantees. 

Literally within days, state Attorneys General and others began to file lawsuits seeking to overturn the policy (2).  To date, 10 lawsuits have been filed, including a complaint filed just last week by the Washington Parents Network. (3)
 
Thus far, judges have issued rulings on five cases. Remarkably, every one of decisions imposed a temporary injunction for their respective states on the “arbitrary and capricious” Title IX rule:
  • June 13: Judge Terry Doughty for the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho (4).
  • June 17: Judge Danny Reeves for Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia (5).
  • July 2: Judge John Broomes for Kansas, Alabama, Utah, and Wyoming, plus all schools attended by the children of Moms for Liberty and by members of the Young America’s Foundation (6). A listing of the affected schools is available online. (7)
  • July 11: Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk for the state of Texas. In addition, the judge noted he is considering extending his injunction to all 50 states in the nation (8).
  • July 11: Judge Reed O’Connor for the Carroll Independent School District in Texas (9).
For two of these decisions, the Department of Education filed an appeal. In both cases, the appellate courts promptly denied the request:
  • July 17:  District Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit (10)
  • July 17: District Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. (11)
Seldom in American jurisprudence have a series of federal courts acted so swiftly and so decisively to overturn a new Executive Branch regulation. 
With the August 1, 2024, deadline fast approaching before the Biden administration’s new Title IX Final Rule takes effect, additional court decisions are expected to be issued soon.

As these lawsuits continue to be litigated, the 232 organizational members of the Title IX Network will continue to monitor the situation and take appropriate action (12). Interested organizations that wish to join the Title IX Network should contact Robert D. Thompson at rthompson@saveservices.org

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.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/

 
 
 
 

11.    https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.219883/gov.uscourts.ca5.219883.73.1.pdf

Categories
Department of Education Due Process Gender Identity Office for Civil Rights Title IX

Federal Judges Sound the Death Knell on Joe Biden’s ‘Gender Identity’ Experiment

PRESS RELEASE

Robert Thompson: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Federal Judges Sound the Death Knell on Joe Biden’s ‘Gender Identity’ Experiment

WASHINGTON / July 15, 2024 – Over 50 years ago, Marxist Shulamith Firestone laid out her grand vision for gender equality: “genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally…The tyranny of the biological family would be broken.” (1) As far-fetched as her proposal might sound, activists around the world began to take up the challenge, concocting their theory of “transgenderism.”

Accordingly on his first day in office, President Biden issued an Executive Order that decreed, “All persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation.” (2) On April 19 of this year, the Biden Department of Education issued its final Title IX rule that expanded the meaning of sex to include “gender identity.” (3)

Response to the new policy was resoundingly negative. Numerous governors and state superintendents of education instructed their schools to ignore the rule (4). One editorial ridiculed the policy as a “repulsive attempt to erase biological truth.” (5)

Literally within days, state Attorneys General and others began to file nine lawsuits seeking to overturn the policy (6).  To date, five decisions have been handed down. Remarkably, every one of decisions imposed a temporary injunction for their respective states on the “arbitrary and capricious” Title IX rule:

  • June 13: Judge Terry Doughty for the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho (7).
  • June 17: Judge Danny Reeves for Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia (8).
  • July 2: Judge John Broomes for Kansas, Alabama, Utah, and Wyoming, plus all schools attended by the children of Moms for Liberty and by members of the Young America’s Foundation (9).
  • July 11: Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk for the state of Texas. In addition, the judge noted that he is considering extending his injunction to all 50 states in the nation (10).
  • July 11: Judge Reed O’Connor for the Carroll Independent School District in Texas (11).

In parallel fashion, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a separate regulation in May requiring states to pay for so-called “gender affirming” treatments (12). This rule, which also relies on a bloated definition of sex to include gender identity, was met with several lawsuits as well.

On July 3, two federal judges issued injunctions against the DHHS rule. The first applied to Texas and Montana (13). More devastating to the Washington bureaucrats, the second decision blocked the DHHS rule throughout the entire nation (14).

Topping off this remarkable string of decisions, on June 28 the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling that overturned the long-standing Chevron doctrine (15). In the past, the Chevron doctrine provided a legal fig leaf to the Department of Education and other federal agencies seeking to escape accountability and issue intrusive regulations.

Seldom in American jurisprudence have judges issued a series of decisions within a period of just four weeks, all with the intended effect of blocking the implementation of ill-conceived and unlawful federal regulations.

As these lawsuits continue to be litigated, the 229 organizational members of the Title IX Network will continue to monitor the situation and take appropriate action (16). Interested organizations that wish to join the Title IX Network should contact Robert Thompson at rthompson@saveservices.org

Links:

  1. https://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/firestone-shulamith/dialectic-sex.htm
  2. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-preventing-and-combating-discrimination-on-basis-of-gender-identity-or-sexual-orientation/
  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/2024/04/do-not-comply-fight-americans-revolt-against-new-title-ix-rule/
  5. https://nypost.com/2024/04/22/opinion/bidens-title-ix-revisions-are-a-repulsive-attempt-to-erase-truth/
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  7. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.205659/gov.uscourts.lawd.205659.53.0.pdf
  8. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.kyed.104801/gov.uscourts.kyed.104801.100.0.pdf
  9. https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/KansasStateofetalvUnitedStatesDepartmentofEducationetalDocketNo52?doc_id=X7VSH1UVO6B9K1AAI088P6TS9IF
  10. https://www.newsweek.com/transgender-policy-texas-schools-donald-trump-kacsmaryk-title-ix-1924387
  11. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.390056/gov.uscourts.txnd.390056.43.0.pdf
  12. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/05/06/2024-08711/nondiscrimination-in-health-programs-and-activities
  13. https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:b4159447-f7c6-4f28-81d3-11dd1d78de37
  14. https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/pr/2024/section-1557-opinion.pdf
  15. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c51ywwrq45qo
  16. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-Policy/
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