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.
2⃣ED should prohibit bias at any step in the reporting and investigation processes. Investigators and decision-makers should be trained and vetted for conflicts of interest–– including a school’s fear of litigation.
3⃣ED should promote investigative and decision-making models that contain the checks and balances needed to promote procedural and substantive fairness. Such as dual and multiple investigator models and panel-style decision-making.
4⃣ED should require schools to provide parties with equitable, meaningful accommodations. This includes measures to ensure student safety, to provide emotional and logistical support, and to make it possible for students to continue to learn.
5⃣ED should holds schools to the same expectations of equity and fairness in sexual misconduct investigations as in all other investigations related to civil rights. This means ED must adopt uniform procedural guidelines for investigating all student civil right violations.
While it may be easy to depict complainant and respondent interests as mutually exclusive, this is false.
We encourage @usedgov to create processes that support a survivors' continued access to education while upholding a fair process for respondents.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵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.
🧵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."