Just in: Judge denies blue-state AG's motion to block new TIX regs. Rule goes into effect on Friday.
Judge Nichols' summary: 
Court notes that ED's use of Davis standard for sexual harassment hardly arbitrary; and in any case ED separated out sexual violence/quid pro quo cases anyway.
Court acknowledges ED's concerns w/balancing free speech and sexual harassment, & cites persuasive nature of Judge Koeltl's opinion on the question.
Court dismisses blue-state arguments about off-campus limitations of TIX, noting that their objection is to the language of the statute, not the regs.
Court dismisses blue-states' lengthy complaints about fair grievance procedures in one paragraph, implies they weren't serious. Hard to imagine any court arguing that x-examination is some sort of unfair or gender-biased procedure.
Court has more concerns w/K-12 section of regs, but declines to substitute its judgment for ED's in the matter.
Court also has concerns w/mandatory dismissal section of regs, but is persuaded by the department's (very effective) supplementary brief.
Court rejects blue-states' virus argument: "schools have had almost two years to analyze and understand [regs'] requirements." In any case, many schools have already implemented w/o any problems.
On irreparable harm, court agrees w/Judge Koeltl's opinion, & notes whatever harm might occur, it's minimal.
Public interest prong: court notes that ED (unlike, it seems, the blue states) also "considered important countervailing interests, including the fair treatment of respondents and the protection of various constitutional rights implicated in sexual harassment investigations."
Full opinion--not as ringing an endorsement of the new regs as Judge Koeltl's opinion was, but nonetheless a complete victory for the Department:
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
