Category: Press Release

Assailed from the Right and the Left, Biden ‘Gender Identity’ Proposals Face Mounting Opposition

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date August 1, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Assailed from the Right and the Left, Biden ‘Gender Identity’ Proposals Face Mounting Opposition

WASHINGTON / August 1, 2022 – Criticisms of the Biden “gender identity” proposals have increased in recent days. The disapprovals have been issued by liberals and conservatives, federal lawmakers, state governors, attorneys general, and others.

These criticisms have multiplied and intensified over the past two weeks:

July 21: Twenty U.S. senators wrote a letter to President Biden charging his Title IX proposal would return colleges to a “deeply flawed disciplinary process.” (1)

July 22: Three feminist professors published an editorial in the Chronicle of Higher Education claiming the Title IX regulation’s mandatory reporting provision is a “violation of adult autonomy” and saying the proposal “will only make things worse.” (2)

July 26: Twenty-two Attorneys General filed a 17-count lawsuit against the United States Department of Agriculture seeking to block its plan to withhold school lunch funding from schools that do not comply with Biden’s gender identity agenda (3).

July 26: Former President Trump issued a strongly worded statement describing the Biden gender identity proposals as the “perverted sexualization of minor children.” (4)

July 27: Fifteen Republican governors released a joint letter to President Biden vowing, “our states will have no choice but to pursue avenues to redress any harm that is done to our children as a result” of any reinterpretation of Title IX (5).

July 27: The Catholic News Service described a recently proposed DHHS regulation on transgender services as posing an “existential threat to religious-based employers.” (6)

July 30: Bari Weiss’ Common Sense published an article, “The Beginning of the End of ‘Gender-Affirming Care’?” documenting how several liberal-leaning European countries are now reining in their gender transitioning initiatives (7).

The Biden Title IX proposal is deeply flawed because it would harm due process, free speech, women’s sports, bathroom privacy, and parental rights; and would expand the practice of gender experimentation (8).

To date, nearly 140 organizations have come out in opposition to the Title IX plan (9). A rally will be held in Washington, DC on August 11 to call on the Department of Education to disavow its plan to move forward with its Title IX proposal (10).

According to a recent UCLA report, 1.4% of all youth ages 13-17 self-identify as transgender (11).

Citations:

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

Three Judicial Decisions Spotlight Flaws of Biden Title IX Plan. SAVE Urges Lawmakers to Not Remain Silent.

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date July 25, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Three Judicial Decisions Spotlight Flaws of Biden Title IX Plan. SAVE Urges Lawmakers to Not Remain Silent.

WASHINGTON / July 25, 2022 – Three judicial decisions handed down in the past month reveal major problems with the proposed Title IX policy that was recently released by the Department of Education (1). Over 130 organizations around the country have come out in opposition to the plan (2). SAVE urges lawmakers to speak out strongly against the Biden proposal.

The three judicial decisions highlight the harmful effects of the Title IX proposal on free speech, women’s sports, and due process.

Free Speech

On June 30, the District Court of Idaho handed down a decision against the University of Idaho in favor of three Christian law students who had objected to Title IX “no contact orders” that were issued against them (3). The orders had been issued only because the students had offered to engage in a respectful conversation about biblical teachings of marriage and sexuality. In the ruling, Judge David Nye noted that the university’s actions, “were designed to repress specific speech.”

The decision highlights the fact that the Department of Education is proposing a sweeping re-definition of sexual harassment that many believe will interfere with the exercise of free speech (4).

Women’s Sports

On July 15, Judge Charles Atchley of the Eastern District Court of Tennessee ordered the U.S. Department of Education to cease its unlawful enforcement of a directive allowing transgender athletes to participate in women’s sports (5).

The decision is timely because the proposed Title IX regulation would expand the definition of “sex” to include “gender identity,” opening the door to wider participation of transgenders in women’s sports. In response, federal lawmakers of both parties have issued statements condemning the policy’s harmful effects on female athletics (6).

Due Process

Last Wednesday, Judge CJ Williams of the District Court of Northern Iowa issued a sweeping decision against Fordt University. The court noted widespread procedural irregularities including not informing the accused student of his rights, bias by the Title IX Coordinator, and the shredding of documents by school officials (7). The decision was one of the most sweeping Title IX rulings issued in the past decade.

Similar irregularities would be encouraged by the Biden plan, which removes a student’s right to a number of fundamental due process protections such as impartial investigations and cross-examination (8).

A more detailed analysis of the free speech, women’s sports, and due process concerns raised by the Biden Title IX proposal is available online (9). Even though the federal Title IX law was enacted to curb sex discrimination in schools, many believe the recent Title IX proposal will actually worsen these problems (10).

A rally will be held in Washington, DC on August 11 to highlight these concerns, and to call on the Department of Education to abandon its plans to move forward with the Title IX proposal (11).

Citations:

Due Process False Allegations Legal Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

Three Recent Appellate Decisions Raise the Bar for Procedural Fairness at Private Universities

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date June 20, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Three Recent Appellate Decisions Raise the Bar for Procedural Fairness at Private Universities

WASHINGTON / June 20, 2022 – Three recent appellate decisions highlight the growing number of judicial decisions against private institutions finding a lack of fairness in Title IX proceedings. The decisions were handed down during the past month against Denver University, Cornell University, and Harvard University.

In Doe v. University of Denver, the Colorado Court of Appeals made two findings against the school (1). First, the university’s Equal Opportunity Procedures were found to be sufficiently certain to be enforced under Colorado contract law. Second, “a private educational institution owes a duty, independent of any contractual promises, to adopt fair procedures and to implement those procedures with reasonable care when it investigates and adjudicates claims of sexual misconduct by one student against another.” (2)
In Vengalattore v. Cornell University, appellate Judge Jose Cabranes issued one of the most strongly worded judicial statements ever made in the Title IX context (3). Comparing campus disciplinary committees to the infamous English Star Chambers, the Judge warned gravely, “[T]hese threats to due process and academic freedom are matters of life and death for our great universities.” (4)
In Sonoiki v. Harvard University, the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week on a breach of contract claim, reversing the decision of the district court (5). Following allegations of sexual misconduct against the man, the court chided the University, “Sonoiki reasonably expected the [Administrative] Board to conduct the proceedings in accordance with the procedures laid out in writing as well as in accordance with his fair interpretation of the contractual terms.” (6)

SAVE’s analysis of 170 judicial decisions reveals that each of the 27 major regulatory provisions in the 2020 Title IX regulation is consistent with at least one judicial decision (7). A recent SAVE survey found that 87% of Americans believe that colleges should uphold the presumption of innocence in Title IX proceedings (8).

Persons should urge the Department of Education to assure that its upcoming Title IX regulation assures fair procedures at all institutions of higher education. Contact Secretary Miguel Cardona, telephone (202) 401-3000; fax (202) 260-7867; email ocr@ed.gov.

Links:

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

Title IX Reform Emerging as High-Profile Issue for November Elections

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date June 13, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Title IX Reform Emerging as High-Profile Issue for November Elections

WASHINGTON / June 13, 2022 – Title IX is the federal law that bans sex discrimination in schools. As a result of a series of controversial policy changes, Title IX has now become one of the most hotly debated topics in America, and is poised to influence the outcome of numerous elections on Tuesday, November 8.

In 2021, Loudon County, VA approved a policy on Rights of Transgender and Gender-Expansive Students that states, “All students are entitled to have access to restrooms and locker rooms that are sanitary, safe, and adequate…Students shall be allowed to use the facility that corresponds to their consistently asserted gender identity.” (1)

Shortly afterwards, a male student entered the school girl’s bathroom and committed a sexual assault. The incident soon became a flashpoint in the Virginia governor’s race (2), leading to the upset victory on November 3 of Republican Glenn Youngkin over Democrat Terry McAuliffe.

Since then, Title IX controversies have spread to schools across the country. The following Title IX-related events occurred within the past several days:

June 2: In a milestone Title IX decision against Cornell University, appellate Judge Jose Cabranes 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.” (3)
June 8: A Washington Post editorial deplored the Title IX complaints against three eighth-grade boys in Wisconsin for referring to a classmate using the biologically correct pronoun “her,” instead of the classmate’s preferred “them.” (4)
June 8: Female long-distance runner Madison DeBos published a widely circulated editorial in which she shared the “disheartening and even heartbreaking” feeling of competing against biological males (5).
June 12: Democrat Tulsi Gabbard made a statement strongly critical of the new gender pronoun policy at the State University of New York, deriding the policy as an example of “forced conformity” (6).

A recent SAVE survey reveals that 63% of Americans oppose the Department of Education’s plan to expand its long-standing definition of sex to include “gender identity.” The national survey also shows that strong majorities of Americans reject other proposed changes to Title IX (7).

All candidates for political office are urged to outline their views on the need for Title IX reform. Concerned persons should urge the Department of Education to cancel its plans to issue a new Title IX regulation. Contact Secretary Miguel Cardona, telephone (202) 401-3000; fax (202) 260-7867; email ocr@ed.gov.

Links:

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

63% of Americans Oppose Expanding Definition of Sex to Include ‘Gender Identity’

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date June 6, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

63% of Americans Oppose Expanding Definition of Sex to Include ‘Gender Identity’

WASHINGTON / June 6, 2022 – A new survey reveals that nearly two-thirds of Americans oppose the Department of Education’s plan to expand its long-standing definition of sex to include “gender identity” (1). The national survey, conducted for SAVE by YouGov, also shows that strong majorities of Americans reject other proposed changes to Title IX, the federal law that bans sex discrimination in schools.

Following are respondents’ responses to the six survey questions, among those who offered an opinion:

Definition of Sex:

Keep traditional biological definition: 63%
Expand the definition to include “sex stereotypes, sex-related characteristics (including intersex traits), pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity:” 37%

Transgender Participation in Women’s Sports:

Allow: 29%
Not allow: 71%

Parental Consent Prior to School Counseling about Gender Dysphoria:

Require parental consent prior to counseling: 61%
Not require parental consent: 39%

Parental Opt-out for Children’s Participation in Sex Education Classes:

Allow parental opt-out: 69%
Not allow parental opt-out: 31%

Presumption of Innocence or Guilt for College Disciplinary Hearings:

Presumption of innocence: 87%
Presumption of guilt: 13%

Definition of Sexual Harassment:

Retain current definition to protect free speech: Conduct that is “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive, and that so undermines and detracts from the victims’ educational experience that the victim-students are effectively denied equal access to an institution’s resources and opportunities:” 57%
Expand the current definition to discourage persons from saying things that may be unwelcome or upsetting: 43%

Overall, males and females gave similar responses, with the exception of Question 6. While 66% of males preferred to retain the current definition of sexual harassment, 53% of females indicated a preference to expand the definition of sexual harassment to discourage statements that may be unwelcome or upsetting.

For all six questions, 17-24% of all persons responded, “No opinion/Don’t know.” The “No opinion/Don’t know” responses were excluded from the results presented above. The full survey results and cross-tabulations can be viewed online (2).

All data are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 2,566 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between May 31 to June 2, 2022. The survey was conducted online. The data have been weighted and are representative of all U.S. adults (ages 18+). Response options were randomly switched to minimize primacy-recency effects.

Nearly 90 groups have expressed opposition to the draft Title IX regulation (3), which is expected to be issued later in June. SAVE urges concerned persons to speak out to assure the upcoming Title IX regulation conforms to the opinions of a majority of Americans.

Contact Department of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, telephone (202) 401-3000; fax (202) 260-7867; email ocr@ed.gov.

Links:

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

82 Leading Professors, Attorneys, and Others Call on Dept. of Education to Suspend Plan to Issue New Title IX Regulation

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date May 2, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

82 Leading Professors, Attorneys, and Others Call on Dept. of Education to Suspend Plan to Issue New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / May 2, 2022 – Today, 82 leading professors, attorneys, and others are issuing a call for the Department of Education to “immediately suspend all plans to issue a new Title IX regulation due to the Department’s inability to provide a sound explanation why the 2020 regulation requires revision.” (1) The thought leaders include professors of law and other disciplines, leading civil rights attorneys, physicians, women’s rights advocates, non-profit executives, a former university president, and other persons from across the country (2).

The 82 thought leaders are echoing the calls of two other groups that are urging the federal Department of Education to drop plans to issue a new Title IX regulation.

On April 4, 26 leading organizations sent a letter to the Department of Education noting that concludes, “We strongly urge the Department to set aside its Title IX rulemaking and to allow institutions to continue their efforts to comply with the 2020 Rule.” (3)
On April 5, the Attorneys General from 15 states issued a letter expressing concerns regarding the proposed regulation’s “detrimental effect,” and calling on the Department to “cancel its plans to engage in rulemaking on Title IX.” (4)

The three groups’ concerns revolve around the likelihood that the new regulation will give rise to a wave of civil rights lawsuits in the areas of free speech, due process, and women’s sports:

Free Speech: A federal appeals court recently ruled that the University of Central Florida’s broadly worded free speech policy violates the First Amendment. In a 38-page decision, Judge Kevin Newsom wrote the UCF policy “objectively chills speech because its operation would cause a reasonable student to fear expressing potentially unpopular beliefs.” (5)

Due Process: It is widely believed that the upcoming regulation will reduce due process protections for accused students and faculty members (6). SAVE’s Analysis of Judicial Decisions Affirming the 2020 Title IX Regulation summarizes 175 lawsuits to date in which judges have ruled in favor of the accused (7).

Women’s Sports: The new regulation would redefine “sex” to include sexual orientation and gender identity (8). This would allow transgenders, who are generally taller and stronger, to compete in sports events against persons who were biological females at birth. This would vitiate the purpose of Title IX, which is to assure fairness for all students regardless of sex. To date, 12 states have enacted laws that ban the participation of transgenders against persons who were biological females at birth (9).

Persons are urged to contact Secretary Miguel Cardona and request that he immediately suspend plans to issue a new Title IX regulation. Telephone (202) 401-3000; fax (202) 260-7867; email ocr@ed.gov.

Links:

Campus Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Press Release

Twitter Controversy Highlights Precarious State of Campus Free Speech. Concerned Persons Urged to Act by Friday.

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date April 26, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Twitter Controversy Highlights Precarious State of Campus Free Speech. Concerned Persons Urged to Act by Friday.

WASHINGTON / April 26, 2022 – Monday’s news that Elon Musk reached an agreement to purchase Twitter for $44 billion has triggered heated debate about the role of free speech in American society, including on college campuses.

While many hailed the Twitter purchase as helping to restore democratic ideals, Robert Reich, former U.S. secretary of labor and professor at the University of California at Berkeley, darkly warned that Musk was seeking to “control one of the most important ways the public now receives news.” (1)

The dismal state of campus free speech is revealed by a recent survey of 481 colleges. The survey found that only 12% of colleges received a “green light” rating, meaning the schools had no written policies that seriously imperil free speech (2).

Three recent developments reveal growing momentum in the national effort to restore free speech on college campuses:

Ohio: Last week, it was announced that Shawnee State University had agreed to pay philosophy professor Nick Meriwether $400,000 after disciplining him for not using a transgender student’s preferred pronouns (3).
Oklahoma: Governor Kevin Stitt signed HB 3543 into law, which will establish the Oklahoma Free Speech Committee to review First Amendment complaints at public universities in the state (4).
Florida: Last Thursday, a federal appeals court ruled that the University of Central Florida’s broadly worded free speech policy violates the First Amendment. In a 38-page decision, Judge Kevin Newsom wrote the UCF policy “objectively chills speech because its operation would cause a reasonable student to fear expressing potentially unpopular beliefs.” (5)

Unfortunately, a new threat to campus free speech now looms. In May, the federal Department of Education is expected to release a draft Title IX regulation that many fear will reduce due process protections for students and faculty members accused of violating campus speech codes (6).

In response, the Attorneys General from 15 states sent a strongly worded letter on April 5 to the Department of Education. The letter concludes, “We strongly urge the Department to cancel its plans to engage in rulemaking on Title IX.” (7)

SAVE invites interested persons to contact the Department of Education and urge that the new regulation:

Preserve the presumption of innocence
Not expand existing definitions of sexual harassment
Mandate live hearings with cross-examination of the parties

Contact Secretary Miguel Cardona, telephone (202) 401-3000; email ocr@ed.gov; fax (202) 260-7867.

The new Title IX regulation is expected to be issued in May. Persons are urged to contact Secretary Cardona by this coming Friday, April 29.

Links:

Campus Due Process False Allegations Press Release Sexual Assault

South Carolina Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Wrongfully Accused Clemson U. Student on Defamation and Civil Conspiracy Claims

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date April 5, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

South Carolina Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Wrongfully Accused Clemson U. Student on Defamation and Civil Conspiracy Claims

WASHINGTON / April 5, 2022 – Seven appellate and 42 trial court decisions document the widespread problem of biased campus investigations in Title IX cases (1). Last week, a South Carolina jury awarded $5.3 million to a wrongfully accused Clemson University student on defamation and civil conspiracy claims. The decision is believed to represent the largest amount ever awarded to a student falsely accused of sexual misconduct.

The events revolved around a Clemson student named Erin Wingo, her boyfriend Colin Gahagan, and romantic interest Andrew Pampu (2).

Beginning in September 2015, Wingo initiated a sexual encounter with Pampu. At an October 24 birthday party, Wingo reportedly said, “if you don’t kiss me now, you won’t have sex with me tonight.”

The two later left the party. According to multiple witnesses, she walked unassisted, was able to engage in a coherent conversation, and didn’t slur her words. Arriving at a secluded spot, Wingo began to remove her clothes. In his lawsuit, Pampu noted that he repeatedly asked for Wingo’s consent, even though she was the person initiating the contact.

The next morning, Wingo sent Pampu a text message pleading with him to not tell her boyfriend Gahagan of the encounter, making no mention of any sexual misconduct.

On November 11, Wingo filed a Title IX complaint with Clemson University alleging nonconsensual sexual assault, asserting that she had no recollection of the encounter as a result of being intoxicated. Violating campus confidentiality policies, she began to tell her circle of friends that Pampu was a “rapist.”

Campus officials opened their investigation of the case, in the process making a series of important errors:

1. Ignored the testimony of multiple eye-witnesses who did not view Wingo’s consumption of alcohol as excessive. The witnesses included the dormitory Resident Assistant who saw Wingo shortly after the sexual encounter.

Disregarded Wingo’s morning-after text message to Pampu.
Failed to account for the fact that Wingo informed her friends of the sexual encounter, but made no mention of it being nonconsensual.

Based on the flawed investigative report, campus adjudicators found Pampu responsible for sexual misconduct and suspended him for one semester. Upon appeal, the sanction was increased by an additional 12 months.

Afterwards, boyfriend Gahagan sent a startling text message to accused student Pampu: “You’re innocent. I lied in that hearing. Erin wanted to have sex that night. Get your brothers away from me and never touch your life again and I’ll come through with the truth that she lied. I deleted the texts from that night prove she was f****** crazy.”

Pampu thereupon filed a federal lawsuit against Clemson University, resulting in the institution removing all mention of the Title IX disciplinary finding from his transcript, and making a financial payment to Pampu.

Pampu then filed a lawsuit in South Carolina state court, alleging defamation and civil conspiracy against Wingo, Wingo’s father, and Gahagan. During the week-long trial, five eye-witnesses testified they did not observe Wingo to be too drunk to consent on the night of the encounter. The jury also considered evidence showing how the defendants conspired to get Pampu removed from Clemson University and from his fraternity.

On March 25, 2022, the jury announced a $5.3 million award. Pampu’s attorney, Kimberly Lau (4), later commented, “The truth, quite literally, prevailed here.”

Links:

https://www.saveservices.org/2022/02/7-appellate-court-and-42-trial-court-decisions-have-documented-biased-campus-investigations/
https://www.dailywire.com/news/he-was-accused-of-sexual-assault-by-a-woman-whose-boyfriend-later-admitted-lying-he-just-won-a-5-3m-settlement
Andrew Pampu v. Erin Wingo, Dave Wingo and Colin J. Gahagan. Case No. 2017CP3900709 (Pickens County, South Carolina).
https://www.collegedisciplinelaw.com/Kimberly-Lau

Campus Department of Education Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Lawmakers Urged to Cut Funding for Universities that Refuse to End Sex-Discriminatory Programs

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date March 7, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Lawmakers Urged to Cut Funding for Universities that Refuse to End Sex-Discriminatory Programs

WASHINGTON / March 7, 2022 – The federal Title IX law bans sex discrimination in schools. Defying this decades-old law, hundreds of universities currently offer programs that discriminate against male students. SAVE calls on lawmakers to cut funding for institutions that refuse to end programs that engage in sex-discrimination.

These discriminatory programs address issues such as computer coding; science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); and leadership development. Literally hundreds of colleges around the country are known to offer such illegal offerings. Listings of schools with discriminatory programs (1) and scholarships (2) are available online.

As a rule, universities do not offer corresponding programs designed to address areas for which men are under-represented, such as the behavioral sciences, nursing, or teaching. Nor do they sponsor programs designed to rectify the lagging number of male enrollments in colleges.

In the Teamsters v. United States decision, the Supreme Court ruled that discrimination is not limited to explicit statements like “no male students allowed,” but also can include “actual practices” such as how the program is publicized and “recruitment techniques.” (3) But ignoring this milestone decision, many colleges have responded to discrimination complaints by making “fig leaf” adjustments to program descriptions.

For example, Arizona State University offers a program called “Girls in Tech.” In response to a recent complaint, the school added a legal disclaimer that “Girls in Tech is open to all, regardless of race, color, national origin, or sex.” But male students are unlikely to apply to a program with such a gender-biased title.

James Madison University in Virginia offers a program titled, “madiSTEM” that is described as a “STEM Conference Designed for Girls in Grades 6-8.” Responding to a complaint, the university added the legal disclaimer, “Open to all students, grades 6-8,” but did not change the program description.

The most egregious offender appears to be Stanford University. A recent complaint filed with the federal Office for Civil Rights lists a total of 33 discriminatory programs sponsored by the school. A partial list of the programs includes: Girls Teaching Girls to Code, Girls Code @Stanford, VMware Woman’s Leadership Program, Girls Engineering the Future, Women in STEM, and many more (4).

Sex-discriminatory policies may arise from an undercurrent of anti-male sentiment on college campuses (5). State lawmakers have already begun to place budget cuts on schools that sponsor programs based on social ideologies. (6-7)

SAVE urges state lawmakers to impose a 10% appropriations reduction on “woke” universities that continue to flaunt anti-sex discrimination mandates.

Links:

Campus Press Release Title IX

Colleges Lag in Opening Discriminatory Scholarships and Programs to Male Students

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date March 1, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Colleges Lag in Opening Discriminatory Scholarships and Programs to Male Students. Stanford U. Appears to Be the Worst Offender.

WASHINGTON / March 1, 2022 – Despite recent progress, hundreds of universities continue to offer scholarships and programs that discriminate against male students. SAVE calls on administrators to promptly remove all vestiges of sexism and discrimination at their schools.

Although the Title IX law bans sex discrimination in schools, many institutions have established female-only scholarships and programs that flaunt the federal mandate. For example, the University of Missouri at Columbia offers 70 scholarships for female students, and only one scholarship for male students (1). This imbalance likely contributes to the fact that female enrollments at the school outnumber males: 17,214 versus 13,875 students (2).

Since 2018, SAVE has filed Title IX complaints against over 200 institutions, including the University of Missouri. Virtually all of the resolutions to date have been favorable to SAVE. Colleges that have agreed to terminate their discriminatory scholarships include the University of Massachusetts System, Northeastern University, Texas A&M, American River College in California, and others.

But many complaints are still unresolved. Currently, 152 OCR investigations of sex-discriminatory scholarships remain open (3).

Regarding sex-discriminatory programs, the Office for Civil Rights website currently lists 118 open investigations of such activities (4).

The most egregious offender appears to be Stanford University. An OCR complaint lists a total of 33 discriminatory programs sponsored by the school. A partial list of the programs includes: Girls Teaching Girls to Code, Girls Code @Stanford, VMware Woman’s Leadership Program, Girls Engineering the Future, Women in STEM, and many more (5).

A recent article suggests that sex-discriminatory policies may arise from an undercurrent of anti-male sentiment on college campuses (6). In Teamsters v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that discrimination is not limited to direct signs that people will see (like “no male students allowed”), but can also include “actual practices” such as how the opportunity is publicized and “recruitment techniques.” (7)

Links: