🧵Thread: It's day 2 of the Title IX listening sessions. Follow along for quotes from survivors and those who support them on the current Title IX regulation, and what they would like to see in the new rule.
"I didn't feel like a student, I felt like a liability... in my Title IX process, I learned that schools will do anything to protect themselves, not survivors."
DeVos' rule prioritizes schools' bottom lines over survivors' access to education, that's why it has to go #EDActNow
Title IX Coordinators are joining the listening sessions to share that requiring schools to alter their campus policies within 3 months made it impossible for schools to work with stakeholders, especially students, to try and implement best practices under the regulations.
.@PCARORG raises how ridiculous it is that the DeVos regulation allows respondents to dodge evidence against them through refusing cross-examination. Especially confessions.
"I have heard numerous students say 'MeToo,' but they are too scared to report because they know the law won't help them."
By keeping survivors from reporting, DeVos' rule is making campuses more dangerous and pushing survivors out of school. The rule has got to go!
“Today, Title IX is a complicated, quasi-criminal process. School districts often engage counsel to manage claims and don’t adequately explain the Title IX processes to complainants, including their obligations for student safety and protection from retaliation.”
“While Betsy DeVos hung her hat on what she considers to be due process, we must remember that due process does not look the same for everyone, let alone a Black survivor on a college campus, especially a Black trans woman.”
“Survivors have asked: Why report when the victim knows that they will face and be questioned by the person who took their control? Why report when the perpetrator has more rights than the victim? Why report when it could take a year or more to get a ruling?”
“With the new rule, we cannot treat multiple perpetrator sexual assault cases as though they are the same as single perpetrator cases… For survivors of MPSA there is a heightened risk for retaliation and intimidation because of the number of respondents involved…” (1/3)
“During the case against my assaulters, my university refused to consolidate, leaving me with 2 hearings. The respondents, as well as their witnesses, were able to communicate and unfairly utilised the time between the hearings to alter their statements to their advantage.”(2/3)
“We need a rule that addresses the necessity of consolidating cases so an extra burden is not placed on the complainant.” (3/3)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here are 5 main ways that the parties on differing sides of a Title IX investigation actually have many interests that align. The Department should act decisively to protect all students in those arenas.
1⃣ED should ensure clear and prompt notice of school policies and procedures related to sexual misconduct. This means having clear policies about what constitutes sexual misconduct, a carefully delineated reporting and investigation process, and prompt and unambiguous notice.
🧵THREAD🧵: Quotes from survivors and those who support them on their experiences with the current Title IX policy, and what they would like to see in the new rule.
“I had to withdraw from school because advocating for myself as a teenager and having to learn the ins and outs of the law because my rights weren’t being upheld became a full time job”
“Investigations shouldn’t take more than 60 days because students, especially ones like me without fancy lawyers or parental help, shouldn’t be asked to neglect their education and endure the uncertainty and trauma of a case any longer than that.”
This morning, we released a report drawing from our survey of over 100 student survivors who reported to their schools.
Our report outlines the alarming backlash survivors are facing when filing formal reports of sexual violence to their schools. Thread: knowyourix.org/thecostofrepor…
We found that 39% of survivors who reported to their schools experienced a substantial disruption in their educations.
These educational interruptions were not from sexual violence alone, but because of violence exacerbated by schools’ harmful responses to reports of violence.
When survivors report to their school, instead of receiving support, they are blamed for the violence, told the school will do nothing, face name calling by school officials, have their cases drawn out for years, and get punished for their own assaults after seeking help.
Trump's SCOTUS nominee, Judge Amy Coney Barrett, has a troubling record on Title IX.
Let's break down her record and the impact on students and civil rights.
As our co-founder @azbrodsky shared, "Judge Barrett’s ruling turned a sex discrimination statute on its head, using a law meant to prevent and address sexual assault to promote impunity for that very same behavior."
To be clear, our concern with this case isn't her decision on the Doe's due process claim. But instead on her interpretation of Title IX and administrative enforcement of civil rights.
🚨BREAKING: Amy Coney Barrett has been announced the nominee for the Supreme Court Justice 8 days after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.This is what you should know:
According to the Human Rights Campaign, Judge Barret is an “absolute threat to LGBTQ rights.” hrc.org/news/amy-coney…
Barrett has falsely stated that Title IX protections do not include transgender individuals and has misgendered transgender women by claiming they are “physiological males.”
ED just released a Q&A on the Title IX rule, and it's bad.
The doc explains how schools should handle "statement evidence." Like we've said before, the rule allows respondents to dodge damming evidence, even if they confessed. Let's dive in ➡️www2.ed.gov/about/offices/…
ICYMI, our manager @Sage_Gaea broke down this provision and it's impact in @TIME.
Many folks insisted that we must just be misunderstanding how the rule would handle statement evidence, but the Q&A makes it fairly clear we aren't. time.com/5879262/devos-…
Question 12 of the Title IX Q&A explicitly states that if a party or witness refuses to answer any and all questions during cross, or doesn't appear at the hearing, then their statement's "cannot be relied on by the decisionmaker."