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

68 Groups Endorse Appropriations Plan to Trim Controversial Title IX Provisions from Department of Education

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

68 Groups Endorse Appropriations Plan to Trim Controversial Title IX Provisions from Department of Education

WASHINGTON / July 25, 2023 – A coalition of 68 organizations is sending a letter today to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy that endorses important provisions related to the federal Department of Education, as enumerated in the FY2024 Appropriations Bill for Labor-HHS-Education.

The 68 organizations are all members of the Title IX Network, which was formed in July 2022 in opposition to the Biden administration’s proposed Title IX regulations (1).

The Department of Education’s proposed Title IX regulations, which are scheduled to be released in October, would change the definition of “sex” to include “gender Identity.”  The proposed regulations also would harm women’s sports, promote gender transitioning among young children without parental consent, infringe on free speech, and remove due process protections for men who have been falsely accused.

As explained in the letter, the 68 organizations support key provisions that were approved by the House Appropriations sub-committee in its FY2024 Appropriations bill (2):

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

We urge the House of Representatives to retain all five of these Sections, keep the strong language used in these Sections, and bring the FY2024 Appropriations Bill for Labor-HHS-Education for a prompt floor vote.

The entire coalition letter can be viewed online (3).

Links:

  1. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/
  2. https://appropriations.house.gov/subcommittees/labor-health-and-human-services-education-118th-congress
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/7.25.23-Coalition-letter-Appropriations.pdf
Categories
California Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process False Allegations Feminism Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX Training

Broken on Campus: High-Profile Failures Reveal Title IX Offices are in Desperate Need of Reform

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Broken on Campus: High-Profile Failures Reveal Title IX Offices are in Desperate Need of Reform

WASHINGTON / July 24, 2023 – Three recent reports reveal widespread oversights and failures at university offices that were established to assure compliance with Title IX, the federal law enacted to stop sex discrimination in schools. The problems with Title IX are being seen throughout the country at institutions large and small, private and public, in three areas:

  1. Discrimination against Male Students: A recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education reveals the existence of a broad array of scholarships, leadership development programs, awards, and summer camps that illegally exclude male students. The article notes that economist Mark Perry has filed hundreds of anti-discrimination complaints with the federal Office for Civil Rights, alleging more than 2,000 violations of federal antidiscrimination law by more than 750 colleges in virtually every state around the country (1).
  2. Due Process: To date, 265 judicial decisions have been handed down (2) against colleges for sex discrimination (3), lack of due process, and other similar violations. One of the most notable decisions was rendered on June 27 when the Connecticut Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of student Saif Khan, who had been falsely accused of sexual assault. The Court singled out numerous due process deficiencies in the school’s Title IX procedures, including the fact that Yale “failed to establish an adequate record of the proceedings.” (4)
  3. Handling of Sexual Harassment Complaints: A new report reveals a constellation of failures at California State University, the nation’s largest four-year public university. The report documents the lack of a coordinated approach across the 23-campus system, resulting in sexual misconduct complaints being ignored, mishandled, or falling through the cracks. The report deplores the lack of a “consistent formal process for reporting, resolving, documenting, or tracking” of complaints, and makes numerous recommendations for improvement (5).

Part of the problem can be traced to a lack of legal expertise among Title IX coordinators. According to the Association of Title IX Administrators, the leading trade organization for Title IX coordinators, fewer than one in four coordinators have a Juris Doctor degree (6).  Another analysis revealed a pro-feminist, anti-male bias among many Title IX coordinators (7).

In addition, the Association of Title IX Administrators has a well-documented history of seeking to roll back on Fourteenth Amendment-based due process protections for the accused (8). Last year, a lawsuit was filed against ATIXA president Brett Sokolow for allegedly using company funds for personal purposes and defrauding clients (9).

All of these facts point to a pervasive lack of impartiality, professionalism, and legal expertise in the Title IX field. One might reasonably conclude that these problems need to be addressed before any efforts are make to widen the scope of the Title IX law or increase the duties of Title IX coordinators.

And that’s exactly what the Department of Education’s proposed Title IX regulation seeks to do (10).

Citations:

  1. https://www.chronicle.com/article/a-crusade-to-end-reverse-discrimination?cid=gen_sign_in
  2. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Analysis-of-Title-IX-Regulation-3.24.2022.pdf
  4. https://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR347/347CR30.pdf
  5. https://www.calstate.edu/titleix/documents/cozen-presentation-bot-52423.pdf
  6. https://cdn.atixa.org/site-media/atixa/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/16135903/2021-Survey-Summary.pdf
  7. https://www.nas.org/storage/app/media/Reports/Dear%20Colleague/Dear%20Colleague.pdf
  8. https://www.saveservices.org/more-resources/
  9. https://www.dailywire.com/news/prominent-title-ix-consultant-accused-of-financial-fraud-in-lawsuit-filed-by-former-employee
  10. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/06/30/new-title-ix-rules-raise-concerns-accused
Categories
Campus Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Gender Agenda Gender Identity Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Harassment Title IX

Five Presidential Contenders Have Called for Abolition of the U.S. Department of Education

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Five Presidential Contenders Have Called for Abolition of the U.S. Department of Education

WASHINGTON / July 18, 2023 – The U.S. Department of Education has introduced two proposed Title IX regulations in the past year (1,2) that would expand the definition of sex to include “gender identity,” a change that would have far-reaching effects on students, families, and women’s sports. The proposals also would serve to revamp the meaning of the Constitution, especially its provisions regarding free speech (First Amendment) and due process (Fourteenth Amendment).

In response, five current or previous Republican presidential contenders, listed below in alphabetical order, have called for the abolition of the Department of Education (3):

  1. Ron DeSantis: In response to the question, Are you in favor of eliminating any agencies: “We would do education, commerce, energy, and the IRS….With the Department of Education, we reverse all the transgender sports stuff. Women’s sports should be protected.”
  2. Mike Pence: “Eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and convert some of its current budget to grants to states and localities, providing maximum flexibility in how to deploy federal dollars.”
  3. Mike Pompeo: Asked by commentator John Stossel, “Should America abolish the Department of Education?” Pompeo replied, “Yes, you should get rid of it.” (Pompeo subsequently announced his decision to not run as a presidential candidate).
  4. Vivek Ramaswamy: “I would shut down the U.S. Department of Education…Do I favor 6-year-olds being educated on sexuality and gender ideology? No, I don’t.”
  5. Tim Scott: “The federal government has absolutely no role in our education system whatsoever. So let’s get them out and let’s abolish the Department of Education.”

Four other persons, discussed in media accounts as possible presidential candidates, have called for major changes to Title IX-related education policies (3):

  1. Nikki Haley: “When I was in school you didn’t have sex ed until seventh grade. And even then, your parents had to sign whether you could take the class. That’s a decision for parents to make.”
  2. Kristi Noem: “The [South Dakota] Board of Regents should remove all references to preferred pronouns in all school materials…Students should have the ability to exercise their right to free speech.” “Our universities should not be hosting and/or promoting drag shows…Just as other dangerous theories have been allowed to thrive on college campuses, gender theory has been rebranded and accepted as truth across the nation.” (Noem subsequently announced her decision to not run as a presidential candidate).
  3. Donald Trump: “On Day One, I will revoke Joe Biden’s cruel policies on so-called ‘gender-affirming care,’…we will promote positive education about the nuclear family…I will ask Congress to pass a bill establishing that the only genders recognized by the U.S. government are male and female…the bill will also make clear that Title IX prohibits men from participating in women’s sports.”
  4. Glenn Youngkin: “Political indoctrination has no place in our classrooms….Inherently divisive concepts, like Critical Race Theory and its progeny, instruct students to only view life through the lens of race and presumes that some students are consciously or unconsciously racist, sexist, or oppressive, and that other students are victims.” (Youngkin subsequently announced his decision to not run as a presidential candidate).

State lawmakers in Alabama, Delaware, Idaho, Missouri, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Tennessee also have gone on record to abolish the federal Department of Education (3).

In addition, former Department of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has stated, “I personally think the Department of Education should not exist.” (4)

All persons are invited to sign the petition, “Tell the Dept. of Education to Stop Its Radical Title IX Plan:” https://www.change.org/p/tell-the-dept-of-education-to-stop-its-radical-title-ix-plan

Note: This press release was updated to clarify that Mike Pompeo, Kristi Noem, and Glenn Youngkin later announced their decision to not run for president.

Citations:

  1. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  2. https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-admin-releases-new-title-ix-rules-bars-states-banning-transgender-students-competing-sports
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/attorneys-general-and-lawmakers/
  4. https://www.axios.com/2022/07/17/betsy-devos-abolish-department-of-education
Categories
Civil Rights Department of Education Free Speech Gender Agenda Gender Identity Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

U.S. Department of Education: The New ‘Evil Empire’?

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

U.S. Department of Education: The New ‘Evil Empire’?

WASHINGTON / July 5, 2023 – The Constitution defines the authorities and roles of the judicial, legislative, and executive branches of government as having co-equal powers (1). But in the past two years, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has repeatedly ignored this bedrock principle:

  1. In its proposed Title IX regulation, re-wrote the meaning of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, to the severe detriment of free speech and due process (2).
  2. Proposed to expand the definition of sex to include “gender identity,” thereby usurping the responsibility of Congress to exercise “All legislative Powers.”
  3. Overhauled the definition of sexual harassment:
    • Supreme Court Davis v. Monroe: Actions that are “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive, and that so undermines and detracts from the victims’ educational experience.” (3)
    • New definition on the DOE website: “Sexual harassment is unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.” (4)

Now, the Department of Education has gone beyond trampling on the authority of the Constitution, Congress, and the Supreme Court. Following release of its controversial Title IX proposal in 2022, the DOE has aggressively promoted the transgender agenda, which has had the effect of:

  1. Weakening the authority of parents: “Teachers know what is best for their kids because they are with them every day.” – DOE Secy. Miguel Cardona, May 19, 2023 (5).
  2. Promoting harmful and irreversible “gender transitioning” among under-age children, often without parental knowledge or consent (6).
  3. Enabling violent attacks and bomb threats by transgender activists (7), including the March 27 attack at Covenant School in Nashville that killed six children and staff members.

During the month of June, the DOE issued eight tweets in support of Pride Month (8).  The June 1 tweet went far beyond DOE’s Congressionally mandated authority by offering this sweeping endorsement: “Our message to LGBTQI+ students, teachers, and staff as we begin #PrideMonth: ED has got your back.” (9)

Accordingly, at the annual Drag March in New York City, hundreds of drag performers chanted, “We’re here. We’re queer. We’re coming for your children.” (10) In response, pundits referred to the marchers as “demonic” and “evil.” (11) The liberal-leaning Gays Against Groomers reached a similar conclusion about persons who might say a child was born in the wrong body: “And telling them otherwise is EVIL.” (12)

Not surprisingly, five Republican presidential candidates are now calling for the abolition of the Department of Education (13):

  1. Ron DeSantis: In response to the question, Are you in favor of eliminating any agencies: “We would do education, commerce, energy, and the IRS….With the Department of Education, we reverse all the transgender sports stuff. Women’s sports should be protected.”
  2. Mike Pence: “Eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and convert some of its current budget to grants to states and localities, providing maximum flexibility in how to deploy federal dollars.”
  3. Mike Pompeo: Asked by commentator John Stossel, “Should America abolish the Department of Education?” Pompeo replied, “Yes, you should get rid of it.”
  4. Vivek Ramaswamy: “I would shut down the U.S. Department of Education…Do I favor 6-year-olds being educated on sexuality and gender ideology? No, I don’t.”
  5. Tim Scott: “The federal government has absolutely no role in our education system whatsoever. So let’s get them out and let’s abolish the Department of Education.”

Lawmakers are urged to institute appropriate responses to curtail the illegal actions of the U.S. Department of Education.

Citations:

  1. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separation_of_powers_0
  2. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  3. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/97-843.ZS.html
  4. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/frontpage/pro-students/issues/sex-issue01.html
  5. https://twitter.com/SecCardona/status/1659652692107468811?lang=en
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/gender-transitioning/
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/transgender-violence/
  8. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/abolish-doe/
  9. https://twitter.com/usedgov/status/1664225459742076928/photo/1
  10. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jun/28/pride-vs-shame-were-here-were-queer-were-coming-fo/
  11. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/nbc-out-proud/re-coming-children-chant-nyc-drag-march-elicits-outrage-activists-say-rcna91341
  12. https://twitter.com/againstgrmrs/status/1675991091714183170/photo/1
Categories
Department of Education Gender Agenda Gender Identity Law Enforcement Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

SAVE Condemns Recent Wave of Bomb Threats and Attacks by Transgender Activists

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

SAVE Condemns Recent Wave of Bomb Threats and Attacks by Transgender Activists

June 13, 2023 – Over the weekend, transgender activists made bomb threats against Target stores in five states: Louisiana, Oklahoma, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York. The threats represent the most recent escalation of unlawful actions by proponents of transgender rights.

SAVE has identified the following incidents that occurred in the past two weeks:

June 2, North Hollywood, CA: As a group of parents wearing “Leave Our Kids Alone” T-shirts were protesting an upcoming PRIDE Assembly at a local school, a group of LGBT activists rushed the parents, pushing and shoving them. One arrest was made (1).

June 3, Dallas, TX: During a “kid-friendly” drag show, a protester waved a sign saying, “Keep Kids Out Of Pride Month.” In response, trans activists repeatedly threatened, “Somebody is going to shoot you in the head.” (2)

June 6, Glendale, CA: Antifa member Erik Boyd was arrested for his involvement in a brawl with parents who were protesting Pride Month plans as they were being discussed at a school board meeting (3).

June 10, Lafayette, LA: Multiple Target stores were targeted with bomb threats by suspected LGBTQ activists for removing Pride merchandise (4).

June 10, Oklahoma City, OK: Several Target stores were evacuated after receiving bomb threats that warned, “We hid the bombs inside some product items. The bombs will detonate in several hours, guess which ones have the bombs. Time is ticking.” (5)

June 11, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York: A spate of bomb threats led to the evacuation of numerous Target stores over the weekend after Target removed some of its Pride merchandise (6).

The wave of violence can be traced to a June 2022 Department of Education proposal that seeks to redefine sex to include “gender identity.” (7) That same month, the Trans Resistance Network began to issue inflammatory tweets that referred to transgender critics as “fascists” and made the claim that “Disarming trans people is a preparation for genocide.” (8)

These actions served to embolden and radicalize the transgender movement, presaging a surge of violent incidents around the country.

The attacks have come as members of the gay and lesbian community began to voice criticisms of the transgender movement (9). Gays Against Groomers recently deplored the fact that, “The radical alphabet activists have done more harm to our community than the biggest truly hateful bigot could ever hope to.” (10)

SAVE has identified 21 dangerous incidents committed by transgender activists since last October (11). SAVE condemns this campaign of violence as a deplorable example of domestic terrorism, and calls on authorities to take strong action.

Links:

  1. https://thepostmillennial.com/far-leftists-clash-with-parents-protesting-pride-assembly-at-los-angeles-elementary-school
  2. https://twitter.com/protecttxkids_/status/1665211169563353089
  3. https://thepostmillennial.com/revealed-childless-antifa-member-arrested-following-violent-clash-with-parents-outside-los-angeles-school-board-meeting
  4. https://dailycaller.com/2023/06/12/target-stores-hit-with-bomb-threat-claiming-company-betrayed-the-lgbtq-community/
  5. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12182881/Several-Target-stores-EVACUATED-bomb-threats-companies-LGBTQ-line.html
  6. https://dailycaller.com/2023/06/12/target-stores-hit-with-bomb-threat-claiming-company-betrayed-the-lgbtq-community/
  7. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9nprm.pdf
  8. https://transresistancenetwork.wordpress.com/
  9. https://www.saveservices.org/2023/06/dwindling-support-among-gay-community-for-transgender-agenda/
  10. https://www.facebook.com/gaysagainstgroomers
  11. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/transgender-violence/
Categories
Civil Rights Department of Education Due Process Gender Agenda Gender Identity Title IX

Dwindling Support Among Gay Community for Transgender Agenda

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Dwindling Support Among Gay Community for Transgender Agenda

June 8, 2023 – Gay teacher Ray Shelton recently addressed a meeting of the Glendale Unified School District. Twice named Teacher of the Year, Shelton explained to the board:

“Two plus two equals four. The world is not flat. Boys have penises; girls have vaginas. Gender is binary and cannot be changed. Biology is not bigotry. Heterosexuality is not hate. Gender confusion and gender delusion are deep psychological disorders. No caring professional or loving parent would ever support the chemical poisoning or surgical mutilation of a child’s genitalia….And I can also say this as a gay man.” (1)

The California incident illustrates the reality of dwindling support in the gay and lesbian community for the transgender agenda.

One of the strongest critics of transgender ideology is Gays Against Groomers, which describes itself as an “organization of gays against the sexualization, indoctrination and medicalization of children under the guise of LGBTQIA+.” (2)

Jaimee Michell, president of Gays Against Groomers, recently explained, “As a lesbian and the founder of Gays Against Groomers, I’m done with Pride. Because it’s become a degenerate kink-fest…They’re shoving it down everyone’s throats, especially children’s. It’s disgusting.” (3)

David Leatherwood, Gays Against Groomers secretary, charged, “I’m done with Pride because it’s become an embarrassment. As a gay man, I want nothing to do with it. All it has become now is a celebration of debauchery, indulgence in narcissism, victimhood, and grooming of kids.” (3)

Another outspoken critic is gay activist Simon Edge, who recently derided the transgender movement as “trying to redefine language, reorganize public toilets and changing rooms, kibosh women’s sport and take control of HR departments.” Edge concludes, “Some people don’t think the T belongs with the LGB.” (4)

Transgenderism has become emboldened in recent months by proposed changes to the federal Title IX sex discrimination law (5). Its advocates claim they are working for inclusion and equality. In fact, they are resorting to the use of coercion and violence (6) in their quest to eliminate fairness in women’s sports, persuade vulnerable children to undergo life-altering medical procedures, and encroach on parental rights (7).

Democratic and Republican lawmakers around the country are urged to join forces to oppose any bills being considered that are designed to promote the transgender agenda.

Citations:

  1. https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/06/06/award-winning-gay-teacher-suspended-for-speaking-out-against-transgenderism/
  2. https://www.gaysagainstgroomers.com/
  3. https://www.facebook.com/reel/2522868921205579
  4. https://unherd.com/2023/06/pride-is-no-place-for-homosexuals/
  5. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/transgender-violence/
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/groomers/
Categories
Civil Rights Free Speech Gender Agenda Gender Identity Press Release Title IX

UN Women Must Renounce Its Support for Dishonest and Dangerous Transgender Agenda

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

UN Women Must Renounce Its Support for Dishonest and Dangerous Transgender Agenda

June 6, 2023 – The transgender agenda is a global movement that seeks to erase the distinctions between male and female, thereby weakening the nuclear family (1). Recent weeks have witnessed a rapid expansion of opposition by groups and persons from both the Left and Right.

One of the strongest critics is Gays Against Groomers, a liberal-leaning group that describes itself as an “organization of gays against the sexualization, indoctrination and medicalization of children under the guise of LGBTQIA+.” The group has chapters in Canada, Japan, and the United States (2).

Another vocal critic is British gay activist Simon Edge, who recently derided the transgender movement as “trying to redefine language, reorganise public toilets and changing rooms, kibosh women’s sport and take control of HR departments.” Edge concludes, “Some people don’t think the T belongs with the LGB.” (3)

Echoing many of these concerns, Canadian libertarian Wendy McElroy reveals, “Critics of the trans movement are rebelling against the forced redefinition of biology, the destruction of women’s sports by trans athletes, the hijacking of children’s education, the medical experiment of gender-transitioning children, and the intrusion of penises in women-only spaces.” (4)

In the United States, transgenderism has been emboldened by proposed changes to the Title IX sex discrimination law (5). In recent weeks, the stock prices of Anheuser-Busch (6) and Target (7) have plummeted due to their promotion of trans-themed products.

American media personality Megyn Kelly recently affirmed that she will not engage in the “dishonesty” of using preferred pronouns because they constitute a “gateway drug to genital mutilation.” (8) Twitter CEO Elon Musk is more candid in his analysis: “Gender-affirming care for minors is pure evil.” (9)

Transgenderism has been denounced by the Pope (10), Moslem clerics (11), and other religious groups (12).

To advance its agenda, transgender activists are stifling free speech and resorting to the use of violence (13).

Despite these concerns, UN Women has issued a number of pro-trans tweets in recent days (14), and published a series of reports and position statements in support of the transgender movement (15-17).

Lawmakers around the world are invited to contact UN Women and urge the agency to immediately renounce its support for transgenderism, or face major reductions in its financial support.

Contact information for UN Women liaison offices around the world is available online (18).

Citations:

  1. https://filamtribune.com/how-the-war-against-the-nuclear-family-began/
  2. https://www.gaysagainstgroomers.com/chapters
  3. https://unherd.com/2023/06/pride-is-no-place-for-homosexuals/
  4. https://mises.org/wire/trans-rights-means-trans-entitlements-and-end-civil-society
  5. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  6. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2023/05/31/anheuser-busch-stock-enters-bear-territory-amid-anti-trans-bud-light-backlash/?sh=566fd17c1bfe
  7. https://nypost.com/2023/05/28/target-loses-10b-following-boycott-calls-over-lgbtq-friendly-clothing/
  8. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2023/06/02/megyn_kelly_i_was_unfortunately_an_early_proponent_of_using_preferred_pronouns_trans_people_were_tortured_enough.html
  9. https://twitter.com/elonmusk
  10. https://nypost.com/2023/03/11/pope-francis-gender-ideology-is-one-of-most-dangerous-ideological-colonizations/
  11. https://muslimmatters.org/2022/06/21/fatwa-regarding-transgenderism/
  12. https://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/a-biblical-perspective-on-transgender-identity-a-primer-for-parents-and-strugglers/
  13. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/transgender-violence/
  14. https://twitter.com/UN_Women
  15. https://asiapacific.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2016/05/promoting-and-protecting-the-rights-of-lgbti
  16. https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/statement/2022/05/un-women-statement-for-the-international-day-against-homophobia-biphobia-intersexphobia-and-transphobia
  17. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2022/12/brief-inputs-for-the-report-on-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-and-peace-and-security
  18. https://www.unwomen.org/en/where-we-are/liaison-offices
Categories
Campus Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Attorneys General to DOE: We will “fight your proposed changes to Title IX with every available tool in our arsenal.”

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Attorneys General to DOE: We will “fight your proposed changes to Title IX with every available tool in our arsenal.”

WASHINGTON / June 5, 2023 – The Biden Department of Education (DOE) has issued two draft Title IX regulations that would have broad effects on schools and on society. Among a wide range of changes, the first proposal would expand the definition of biological “sex” to include “gender identity.” (1) The second would promote the participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports (2).

If approved, the proposals would have far-reaching, harmful consequences in other areas such as free speech, due process, parental rights, religious freedom, and gender transitioning of minors (3).

On May 15, 2023 a coalition of 22 state Attorneys General sent a letter to the Department of Education, emphasizing their opposition to the Biden Administration’s proposed athletics regulation. The strongly worded letter from MS, AL, AR, FL, GA, ID, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MT, NE, ND, OH, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, and WV states,

“The proposed rule defies Title IX’s text, history, and purpose. It disregards five decades of evidence showing the benefits of applying the traditional definition of biological sex in sports. It ignores basic considerations of privacy and dignity. And it fails to meet the Department’s duty to analyze costs and benefits.” (4)

This letter is the latest missive from a coalition of Attorneys General opposing the Biden administration’s proposed Title IX regulations:

  • June 23, 2022: Eighteen Attorneys General sent a letter to the DOE warning, “we will fight your proposed changes to Title IX with every available tool in our arsenal.” (5)
  • June 27, 2022: The Attorneys General of AL, AK, AZ, AR, GA, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, MS, MO, MT, NE, OH, OK, SC, SD, TN, and WV amended a prior lawsuit, which resulted in a Preliminary Injunction placed on the draft Title IX regulation (6).
  • September 12, 2022: Responding during the regulation’s open comment period, Attorneys General submitted three separate letters to the DOE:
    • Indiana, joined by the Attorneys General from AL, AZ, AR, GA, KS, KY, LA, MS, MT, NE, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, and WV (7).
    • Montana, joined by the Attorneys General from AL, AR, GA, IN, KS, KY, LA, MS, NE, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, and VA (8).
    • Ohio, joined by the Attorneys General from AL, AK, AR, FL, GA, IN, KS, KY, LA, MS, MT, NE, OK, SC, SD, UT, WV, AND WY (9).

SAVE commends the persistent and principled efforts of the Attorneys General seeking to block the Biden administration’s deeply-flawed Title IX proposals.

SAVE calls on state and federal lawmakers to continue to voice their strong opposition to both Title IX proposals. Email comments to the office of Secy. Miguel Cardona at the Department of Education: alejandro.reyes@ed.gov

Links: 

  1. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  2. https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-admin-releases-new-title-ix-rules-bars-states-banning-transgender-students-competing-sports
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/
  4. https://files.constantcontact.com/d3e83e11901/eb15a34c-c8be-4539-942d-441586065118.pdf?rdr=true
  5. https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/INAG/2022/06/23/file_attachments/2192787/Montana%20Indiana%20Title%20IX%20response%20letter.pdf
  6. https://twitter.com/JakeHigherEdLaw/status/1541555134446141442
  7. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/executive-management/Title%20IX%20NPRM%20Indiana%20Comment%20Letter%20FINAL.pdf
  8. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/executive-management/Montana%20Coalition%20Title%20IX%20Comment%20FINAL%209.12.22.pdf
  9. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/AG-Dave-Yost-Comment-Letter-Title-IX-Proposed-Rule.pdf
Categories
Campus Civil Rights Due Process Legal Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

Supreme Court Must Resolve the Many Circuit Splits that Divide Students’ Rights

Supreme Court Must Resolve the Many Circuit Splits that Divide Students’ Rights

Benjamin North

Associate & Title IX Advisor, Binnall Law Group

May 24, 2023

When a student graduates from high school and looks at potential colleges, they don’t typically do legal research to see where their federal rights differ across federal circuits. They make a very reasonable assumption that their basic rights are the same, because all colleges in the United States are subject to the same federal laws. Unfortunately, this could not be further from the truth when it comes to student discipline. And the recent proliferation of litigation against colleges (meticulously tracked by Brooklyn College professor KC Johnson [1]) has only made the issue more dire.

Court simply cannot agree on the Title IX disciplinary process. Without uniformity in the law, students across the country are subject to wildly different standards, both with respect to what process a university must take before depriving students of their education, and as to what they must allege in a lawsuit if it becomes necessary to correct discriminatory disciplinary actions in court.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has been thus far reluctant to take any of these issues up on certiorari, and its continued delay in resolving these divides will only result in more inconsistencies. Students deserve the same rights under the same law, and it is critical that the Supreme Court ensure that basic consistency.

The first area in which courts are split is the requirement of constitutional due process; that is, the process that a public school must follow before depriving its students of their education in the form of a suspension or expulsion.

The threshold question, of course, is whether education is protected by due process, and if there is any “due process” required at all. If there is no due process required at all, public schools are free as a constitutional matter to expel tuition paying students for no reason at all, and students have no recourse.

While this would seem on its face to be unjust and incompatible with our system of government (and contrary to existing Supreme Court law in Goss v. Lopez [2]), federal district courts in the Fourth Circuit [3] consistently decline to find any protected interest in public university students’ education, leading to that same result: that students are not entitled to any due process at all. While several circuit courts have held that due process applies (at least the First, [4] Fifth, [5] Sixth, [6] Seventh, [7] and Eighth [8] Circuits), the continued failure of the Supreme Court to address the issue directly means that students in the Fourth Circuit very likely will continue to be on the receiving end of judicial opinions that fail to recognize any due process interests whatsoever. Students deserve a clear and basic rule, that due process applies in the public university setting.

Of course, once it is decided that due process applies, the next question is what process is due? On this question, circuits also are split.

The Sixth Circuit, for example, held in Doe v. Baum [9] that live adversarial cross examination was required by due process in student discipline cases where credibility is an issue. The First Circuit disagreed, holding in Haidak v. University of Massachusetts-Amherst [10] that live cross examination is not required; rather, impartial questioning by a hearing panel is required. Setting aside the point that the Sixth Circuit took the correct approach (the standard of an “impartial” hearing panel is more vague and far less workable that simply requiring cross examination, among other issues), the issue remains that students in different circuits have different rights, under the same Constitution.

Similarly, circuits are split on what Title IX requires in these cases. The Second Circuit held in Yusuf v. Vassar College [11] that students seeking to remedy discriminatory discipline under Title IX must plead “erroneous outcome” or “selective enforcement” causes of action under the statute. The Seventh Circuit in Doe v. Purdue [12] disagreed, holding that students need only plead facts sufficient to infer discrimination (which tracks almost exactly the language of the Title IX statute itself). This is a foundational difference on what it takes to bring a Title IX lawsuit in the first place, and again, students have wildly different standards based on where they live or attend school.

Even more alarming, sometimes schools assert during litigation that they may have been biased against the student, but it wasn’t on the basis of sex. This argument, schools hope, saves them from liability under Title IX because the law does not prohibit schools from railroading students per se, only if they do so on the basis of the student’s sex.

Circuits again disagree on whether this argument is sufficient to save the school from liability, or put another way, whether a student has to disprove other potential causes of discipline before getting to discovery or to trial. For example, whereas the Eleventh Circuit in Doe v. Samford [13] affirmed a dismissal of a Title IX lawsuit because the student did not disprove other potential causes of the discipline (other than bias on the basis of sex) in his complaint, the Tenth Circuit in Doe v. University of Denver [14] permitted a lawsuit to go to trial on this issue. The Tenth Circuit reasoned, correctly, that the issue of what bias the university used (bias on the basis of sex or bias on the basis of the student being the accused) is a question of fact that needs to be resolved by a jury, because it comes down to what is more believable. Once again, circuits are split, and students across the country do not have uniform rights.

The above is not an exhaustive listing of all of the disagreements among the federal circuit courts in this area. There are other important areas where courts disagree, including the causation standard for Title IX. But for sake of brevity, suffice it to say that students across the country do not have a clear view of what their rights are. Students deserve the same rights under the same law, and I desperately hope that the Supreme Court takes the opportunity to make that a reality in the near future.

Citations:

[1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CsFhy86oxh26SgTkTq9GV_BBrv5NAA5z9cv178Fjk3o/edit#gid=0

[2] Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975)

[3] See, e.g., Doe v. Alger, 175 F. Supp. 3d 646 (W.D. Va. 2016); Dillow v. Virginia Polytechnic Inst. & State Univ., No. 7:22CV00280, 2023 WL 2320765 (W.D. Va. Mar. 2, 2023); Doe v. Virginia Polytechnic Inst. & State Univ., 400 F. Supp. 3d 479 (W.D. Va. 2019).

[4] See Haidak, infra.

[5] Walsh v. Hodge, 975 F.3d 475 (5th Cir. 2020)

[6] See Baum, infra.

[7] See Purdue, infra.

[8] Doe v. Univ. of Arkansas – Fayetteville, 974 F.3d 858 (8th Cir. 2020)

[9] Doe v. Baum, 903 F.3d 575 (6th Cir. 2018)

[10] Haidak v. Univ. of Massachusetts-Amherst, 933 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2019)

[11] Yusuf v. Vassar Coll., 35 F.3d 709 (2d Cir. 1994)

[12] Doe v. Purdue Univ., 928 F.3d 652 (7th Cir. 2019)

[13] Doe v. Samford Univ., 29 F.4th 675 (11th Cir. 2022)

[14] Doe v. Univ. of Denver, 1 F.4th 822 (10th Cir. 2021)

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

79 Members of Congress Speak Out in Opposition to Biden Title IX Plan

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

79 Members of Congress Speak Out in Opposition to Biden Title IX Plan

WASHINGTON / May 24, 2023 – The Biden Department of Education has issued proposed regulations that would expand the definition of biological “sex” to include “gender identity” (1) and allow the participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports (2).

If approved, these proposals also will have far-reaching, harmful consequences for parental rights (5), free speech (3), due process (4), religious freedom (6), and gender transitioning of minors (7).

In response, 79 members of Congress have released statements of opposition, many of them strongly-worded:

Senate — 29 members:

  1. John Barrasso – WY
  2. Marsha Blackburn – TN
  3. John Boozman – AR
  4. Mike Braun – IN
  5. Katie Britt – AL
  6. Ted Budd – NC
  7. Richard Burr – NC
  8. Bill Cassidy – LA
  9. Tom Cotton – AR
  10. Kevin Cramer – ND
  11. Mike Crapo – ID
  12. Ted Cruz – TX
  13. Steve Danies – MT
  14. Joni Ernst – IA
  15. Josh Hawley – MO
  16. Ron Johnson – WI
  17. James Lankford – OK
  18. Mike Lee – UT
  19. Cynthia Lummis – WY
  20. Roger Marshall – KS
  21. Markwayne Mullins – OK
  22. Pete Ricketts – NE
  23. Marco Rubio – FL
  24. Rick Scott – FL
  25. Tim Scott – SC
  26. Cindy Hyde Smith – MS
  27. Dan Sullivan – AK
  28. Thom Tillis – NC
  29. Tommy Tuberville – AR

House of Representatives — 50 members:

  1. Jodey Arrington – TX
  2. Brian Babin –TX
  3. Jim Banks – IN
  4. Andy Biggs – AZ
  5. Dan Bishop – NC
  6. Lauren Boebert – CO
  7. Mike Bost – IL
  8. Josh Brecheen – OK
  9. Michael C. Burgess – TX
  10. Eric Burlison – MO
  11. Ben Cline – VA
  12. Michael Cloud – TX
  13. Andrew S. Clyde – GA
  14. Eli Crane – AZ
  15. Dan Crenshaw – TX
  16. Byron Donalds – FL
  17. Jeff Duncan – SC
  18. Michelle Fischbach – MN
  19. Virginia Foxx – NC
  20. Bob Good – VA
  21. Mark E. Green, M.D. – TN
  22. Marjorie Taylor Greene – GA
  23. Glenn Grothman – WI
  24. Michael Guest – MS
  25. Andy Harris, M.D. –
  26. Kevin Hern – OK
  27. Clay Higgins – LA
  28. Randy L. Jackson – TX
  29. Mike Johnson – LA
  30. Doug Lamborn – CO
  31. Debbie Lesko – AZ
  32. Anna Paulina Luna – FL
  33. Nancy Mace – SC
  34. Kevin McCarthy – CA
  35. David McKinley – WV
  36. Mary E. Miller – IL
  37. Cory Mills – FL
  38. Nathaniel Moran – TX
  39. Alex X. Mooney – WV
  40. Troy E. Nehls – TX
  41. Ralph Norman – SC
  42. Andy Ogles – TN
  43. George Santos – NY
  44. Steve Scalise – LA
  45. Pete Sessions – TX
  46. Chris Smith – NJ
  47. Gregory Steube – FL
  48. Ann Wagner – MO
  49. Randy Weber – TX
  50. Daniel Webster – FL

In addition, numerous state lawmakers and attorneys general have issued statements of disapproval. Links to all statements are available online (8).

SAVE calls on federal and state lawmakers to continue to voice their opposition to both Title IX regulations. Send email to: alejandro.reyes@ed.gov

Links:

  1. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-proposed-changes-title-ix-regulations-invites-public-comment
  2. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-us-department-educations-proposed-change-its-title-ix-regulations-students-eligibility-athletic-teams.
  3. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/parental-rights/
  4. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/free-speech/
  5. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/due-process/
  6. https://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/First-Liberty-Institute-Statement-on-Title-IX.pdf
  7. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/network/gender-transitioning/
  8. https://www.saveservices.org/2022-policy/attorneys-general-and-lawmakers/