Save - Leading The Policy Movement For Fairness and Due Process On CampusWe found 1,087 results for your search.
Federal appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett and the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed Title IX code of conduct trials were flawed. Wednesday, September 23, 2020 by Jon Miltimore In 2018, following the nomination of Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, President Trump tipped his hand about who he’d be inclined
LAW & JUSTICE Issued on: September 22, 2020 By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. 101 et seq., and in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal contracting, to promote unity in
By Beth Reinhard and Emma Brown The Washington Post, September 20, 2020 Amy Coney Barrett, a leading contender for the Supreme Court seat held by the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, wrote an influential appellate decision last year that made it easier for students accused of sexual assault to challenge universities’ handling of their cases. Barrett
THE COLLEGE FIX She told three different stories – and the last one can be falsified Long Island University punished a black student for sexual assault despite his white accuser’s constantly changing story and several witnesses who either contradicted or couldn’t corroborate her claims, according to a lawsuit filed last week
SAVE One month has now passed since the new Title IX regulation took effect on August 14, 2020.[1] According to this historic civil rights regulation, schools receiving federal funding must now provide students with, among other procedural protections, live hearings and the opportunity for real-time cross examination through an advisor. The Office for Civil Rights
Appellate rulings have shredded colleges for denying due-process protections—the same protections that the Democratic nominee promises to revoke. by KC Johnson, September 15, 2020 “Any number of federal constitutional and statutory provisions reflect the proposition that, in this country, we determine guilt or innocence individually—rather than collectively, based on one’s identification with some demographic group,”