Just in: Court grants summary judgment, on due process count, to acc'd student in @UMichiganNews case. Rules UM's 2018 TIX policy unconstitional, aspects of its "interim" policy unconstitutional, & says UM adm'rs not entitled to qualified immunity on due process claim. 
Court notes that UM's (still-unexplained) decision to not follow the 2017 CA6 Cincinnati ruling means that UM administrators not entitled to qualified immunity on due process claim.
Court unequivocal in its conclusion about UM"s approach: "From its inception to the University’s appeal in Baum, the 2018 Policy was in violation of Circuit precedent." This is a description about one of the nation's leading universities, defying relevant court rulings.
In dicta, court seems to agree w/critics (on both sides) of UM's current policy, which requires acc'd student--rather than his lawyer--to conduct the x-examination.
Court notes that even UM's current policy violates CA6 precedent in at least two ways: "An accused student’s rights must be guaranteed—not left open for interpretation."
Court dismisses TIX claim on grounds that UM's policy might have been anti-accused but not anti-male.
Full ruling, from Judge Arthur Tarnow, is below:
kcjohnson.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/michig…
Full ruling, from Judge Arthur Tarnow, is below:
kcjohnson.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/michig…
