Blog

Appellate Courts Find Sex Bias in School Title IX Decisions

Posted by Joseph D. Lento | May 28, 2022 | 0 Comments

Dozens of trial courts across the nation have found sex bias in the Title IX discipline decisions of school officials. Title IX and its implementing regulation 34 CFR Section 106.45 require school disciplinary officials to conduct fair and impartial discipline investigations and hearings without sex bias in favor of female complainants and against male respondents. Yet those many nationwide trial court decisions show that disciplinary officials continue to cave to public pressures from Title IX activists. Schools continue to discipline innocent accused students to carry forward an agenda reflecting sex bias and sex stereotypes. Those biased Title IX proceedings and punishments violate Title IX, as the many court decisions have found. And now, appellate courts across the nation are confirming credible cases of sex bias by school officials against innocent students wrongly accused of Title IX sexual misconduct.

Appellate Court Decisions

Trial courts only make the initial decisions in Title IX lawsuits brought by innocent accused students whose schools have unjustly found them responsible for sexual misconduct the accused students did not commit. Trial court decisions are generally subject to appeals of right to an independent appellate court panel. And indeed, parties have taken many appeals of those trial court decisions involving school sex bias and sex stereotyping of accused male students in Title IX proceedings. Here are just a few of the federal appellate court decisions confirming the continued sex bias and sex stereotyping in school Title IX discipline:

  • Doe v. Columbia University, 831 F.3d 46 (2d Cir. 2016), finding evidence that school disciplinary officials adopted sex biases against the accused student to counteract student body criticism and public pressure for aggressive enforcement of Title IX
  • Doe v. University of Arkansas-Fayetteville, 974 F.3d 858 (8th Cir. 2020), finding credible inferences that outside pressure had caused the university to adopt biased attitudes against the accused student in the student's Title IX disciplinary proceeding
  • Doe v. University of the Sciences, 961 F.3d 203, 210 (3d Cir. 2020), holding that sex bias had motivated the university to pursue disciplinary charges against the accused student
  • Doe v. Oberlin College, 963 F.3d 580 (6th Cir. 2020), holding that the accused student had stated a claim based on the college's pattern of selective investigation and enforcement of Title IX discipline

Premier Title IX Defense Attorney Representation

Title IX violations can ruin a student's education, reputation, relationships, and future career. Don't let false Title IX allegations lead biased school disciplinary officials into imposing an unjust suspension, dismissal, or other discipline. Don't try to handle the charges on your own or with unqualified local criminal defense attorney representation. Instead, retain national school defense attorney Joseph D. Lento and the Lento Law Firm's Title IX defense team to defend and defeat unjust Title IX charges. Attorney Lento has helped hundreds of students nationwide defeat false Title IX allegations and other misconduct charges. Call 888-535-3686 for a consultation now or use the online service.

About the Author

Joseph D. Lento

"I pride myself on having heart and driving hard to get results!" Attorney Joseph D. Lento passionately fights for the futures of his clients nationwide. Attorney Lento and his team represent students and others in disciplinary cases and various other proceedings at colleges and universities across the United States. Attorney Lento has helped countless students, professors, and others in academia at more than a thousand colleges and universities across the United States, and when necessary, he and his team have sought justice on behalf of clients in courts across the nation. He does not settle for the easiest outcome, and instead prioritizes his clients' needs and well-being. Joseph D. Lento is licensed in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, is admitted pro hac vice as needed nationwide, and he can help you or your student address any school-related issue or concern anywhere in the United States.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Contact Us Today!

footer-2.jpg

If you, or your student, are facing any kind of disciplinary action, or other negative academic sanction, and are having feelings of uncertainty and anxiety for what the future may hold, contact the Lento Law Firm today, and let us help secure your academic career.

This website was created only for general information purposes. It is not intended to be construed as legal advice for any situation. Only a direct consultation with a licensed Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York attorney can provide you with formal legal counsel based on the unique details surrounding your situation. The pages on this website may contain links and contact information for third party organizations - the Lento Law Firm does not necessarily endorse these organizations nor the materials contained on their website. In Pennsylvania, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout Pennsylvania's 67 counties, including, but not limited to Philadelphia, Allegheny, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Dauphin, Delaware, Lancaster, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill, and York County. In New Jersey, attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New Jersey's 21 counties: Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Salem, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren County, In New York, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New York's 62 counties. Outside of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, unless attorney Joseph D. Lento is admitted pro hac vice if needed, his assistance may not constitute legal advice or the practice of law. The decision to hire an attorney in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, New Jersey, New York, or nationwide should not be made solely on the strength of an advertisement. We invite you to contact the Lento Law Firm directly to inquire about our specific qualifications and experience. Communicating with the Lento Law Firm by email, phone, or fax does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Lento Law Firm will serve as your official legal counsel upon a formal agreement from both parties. Any information sent to the Lento Law Firm before an attorney-client relationship is made is done on a non-confidential basis.

Menu