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.