Did the Department of Education Just Win a Case by Claiming Their New Title IX Regulations Aren't Binding?

Posted by Joseph D. Lento | Nov 07, 2019 | 0 Comments

A lawsuit over the Department of Education's no-longer-new amendments to its Title IX regulations took an interesting turn in a federal district court in California. There, the court decided that the Department could not be sued because the amendments were not “final.”

Integral to that decision was the bold argument presented by the Office for Civil Rights, which claimed that the amended regulations were not actually mandatory.

Advocates Sue Over Rollbacks of Obama's Title IX Regulations

The lawsuit stems from the still-simmering disputes from when then-president Obama's Department of Education urged colleges to make it easier for alleged victims of sexual misconduct to come forward. That push had led to vague and ill-defined changes in Title IX policy.

Current President Trump's Department of Education has taken steps to roll back that political pressure. That guidance led to lawsuits by advocate organizations that had cheered the earlier changes.

Lawsuits Plagued by Procedural Issues

Those lawsuits were plagued with procedural issues and defenses.

In order for a new regulation to be challenged in court, it has to be “final.” Regulations that are final are the “consummation of the agency's decision-making process” and determine rights or obligations, “from which legal consequences will flow.”

In an attempt to win the lawsuit, the Department of Education made an interesting claim: The revised rules did not vest rights in anyone. There were no legal consequences of the changes.

This claim was especially interesting, considering the fact that the Department had been circulating two letters of assurance to colleges in the U.S. Those letters required institutions to assure the Department that they would comply with Title IX in order to receive federal funding.

Court Decides that the New Guidelines are Not Mandatory

In the recent decision SurvJustice Inc. v. Devos, a federal district court in California decided that the letters of assurance did not require schools to comply with the newest changes to Title IX.

A big impetus for this decision came in the form of testimony from the Senior Counsel to the Office for Civil Rights, who was a part of the crew that came up with the newest Title IX amendments. He said that, if the OCR initiated an enforcement action under the letters of assurance, “it would proceed under Title IX and its implementing regulations, not the 2017 Guidance.”

Because the letters of assurance did not require schools to follow the new Title IX rules, the court decided that the new rules were not “final” and could not be sued over.

Title IX Defense Lawyer Joseph D. Lento

Needless to say, the ruling – and especially the arguments presented by the OCR and the Department of Education – injects a lot of confusion into an already chaotic Title IX system. If the new amendments are not going to be enforced by the OCR, then what do schools have to do to comply with the law and continue to receive federal funding?

The uncertainty makes it even more important for accused students and faculty members to hire a Title IX defense lawyer. Call Joseph D. Lento at (888) 535-3686 or contact him online.

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.


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

Leave a Comment

Contact Us Today!


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.