By Amber Aamer
Here's a link to the document with complete citations:
What is title ix?
Title IX is a federal landmark law in the United States that was passed as part of the Education Amendments of 1972. It prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any educational program or activity that receives federal funding. The law covers a wide range of educational institutions, as well as other programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance.
The main objective of Title IX is to ensure equal opportunities for men and women in education, including areas such as admissions, athletics, sexual harassment, and employment. It has been instrumental in promoting gender equity and combating gender-based discrimination in education.
Over the years, there have been several changes and interpretations of Title IX by different government administrations and through a variety of court decisions. This blog post will discuss the most recent implementations proposed for Title IX and the potential impacts of the propositions.
current news and progress
Focusing on the Biden government’s proposed amendments to Title IX, they were set to be part of legislation by May 2023, but due to a landslide of public comments that take time to look through and consider, that date has been pushed to October 2023. This may not seem like an issue, but there are consequences for this delay. The least optimal period for postponing the distribution would be during the "red zone," spanning from orientation to Thanksgiving break on college campuses. This timeframe has garnered an unfavourable reputation due to its association with the highest rates of sexual assaults, thereby becoming a critical phase during which students' legal protection is vital. The minimum criteria set by the Trump Government to conduct a sexual assault investigation is unfair. Numerous students are currently unable to seek any sort of redress for their experiences due to the rigid definitions of what constitutes sexual harassment. The Trump administration also stated that institutions were no longer required to look into attacks that occurred off-campus, which posed a huge barrier for victims. The new regulations under the Biden administration were designed to reinstate such protections, but it may be too late for the incoming Freshmen. The first semester of school is when more than half of campus attacks take place, and freshmen women are the group most in danger.
Moving on, in response to allegations that the Department's policies during the Obama era had violated the rights to due process and freedom of speech for students accused of sexual misconduct, the Trump administration introduced regulations that narrowed the scope of sexual harassment, mandated colleges to conduct live hearings involving witness cross-examination, and prohibited the utilization of a "single investigator model" for settling cases of sexual misconduct. Conversely, the proposal put forth by the Biden administration takes an opposite approach. It expands the definition of sexual harassment, removes the requirements for live hearings and witness cross-examination, and permits the same investigator of sexual misconduct complaints to determine the culpability of the accused. While these aspects of the proposal are the most contentious, there exist several additional provisions. These provisions specify who is obligated to report instances of misconduct, the extent of schools' responsibilities, the triggers for initiating investigations, the standard of evidence required, and various other matters.
The suggested regulation aims to enlarge the responsibilities of educational institutions in addressing instances of sexual harassment. This expansion arises from the definition of prohibited hostile environment harassment, which encompasses "unwanted sex-related behavior that is of a significant or pervasive nature." This definition considers both subjective and objective assessments of the circumstances and their impact on an individual's ability to fully engage in or benefit from their educational program or activity.
This shift provides students with heightened safeguards against unwelcome sexual misconduct, without the necessity of demonstrating that the behavior was "sufficiently severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive" to have obstructed educational access, as previously mandated by the regulation. All students stand to gain from a more robust institutional commitment to preventing, terminating, and addressing a wider spectrum of sexual harassment, thereby creating a safer and more inclusive learning environment.
Furthermore, the proposed revisions affirm that Title IX's protections extend to all forms of sex-based discrimination, including instances related to sexual orientation and gender identity, consistent with legal precedent set by the Supreme Court. The establishment of an all-encompassing educational environment necessitates that remedies be accessible for all students facing discrimination. Nevertheless, the advantages of this comprehensive definition of Title IX's scope reach beyond solely those who experience discrimination tied to sexual orientation and gender identity. This broadened perspective not only benefits affected students but also contributes to the overall progress of the nation, as more comprehensive educational settings lay the groundwork for a more inclusive society.
The evolving landscape of Title IX and its associated regulations underscores the intricate interplay between government policies and societal dynamics. As we observe the timeline of changes, it becomes evident that the power to shape legal frameworks rests not only within the halls of government but also within the collective voice of the people. The shifts from administration to administration emphasize the malleability of regulations that safeguard students from sexual harassment and discrimination, illuminating the need for vigilant advocacy to uphold these vital protections.
The impact of these regulations extends beyond the boundaries of campuses. The adjustments to Title IX reflect the broader struggle for equity, inclusivity, and justice within society. By embracing more comprehensive definitions of harassment and discrimination, and by extending protections to encompass a wider range of identities, educational institutions play a pivotal role in fostering an environment that reflects the principles of a progressive and harmonious nation.
As we navigate the intricate balance between individual rights, institutional responsibilities, and societal progress, the lessons gleaned from the evolution of Title IX remind us that the quest for fairness and equality is an ongoing endeavour. Each iteration of regulatory change echoes the collective aspirations of a society striving to create safer spaces, break down barriers, and ensure that all individuals are afforded the opportunity to learn and flourish in an environment free from discrimination and harassment. In this journey, the fusion of informed policy decisions and the power of public engagement will continue to shape the contours of our educational institutions and, in turn, pave the way toward a more inclusive and just society for all.
From Nixon to Biden, the Evolution of Title IX
Initial Passage Nixon Administration (1972):Title IX was enacted as part of the Education Amendments of 1972 and was signed into law by President Richard Nixon. It stated that "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance." Carter Administration (1977-1981): The Carter administration issued regulations that clarified the scope of Title IX and established specific procedures for handling complaints of gender discrimination. These regulations provided a framework for addressing instances of gender discrimination in education. They offered guidance on how institutions should handle complaints and investigations related to Title IX violations, which contributed to more consistent enforcement of the law. Reagan Administration (1981-1989): The Reagan administration sought to weaken the enforcement of Title IX by proposing regulations that would have allowed schools to use a "separate but equal" standard in athletics. This proposed change was met with strong opposition from advocates of gender equity in sports. The attempt to dilute Title IX's effectiveness in ensuring equal opportunities for women in athletics was ultimately abandoned due to public outcry.
Clinton Administration (1993-2001): The Clinton administration's Department of Education issued additional guidelines that emphasized the need for schools to provide equal opportunities for both genders in athletics. These guidelines clarified the three-part test for compliance with Title IX in athletics. The guidelines provided a clearer framework for evaluating compliance, which led to increased efforts to expand opportunities for women in sports. Bush Administration (2001-2009): The Bush Administration issued a policy statement allowing schools to use surveys to demonstrate compliance with Title IX's athletic provisions. This was criticized by advocates for women's sports who argued that surveys were an unreliable method for assessing gender equity. Obama Administration (2009-2017): The Obama administration issued guidelines in 2011 that established a more stringent standard for schools to demonstrate compliance with Title IX in athletics. The guidelines focused on providing equal athletic opportunities and treatment for both genders. These guidelines reinforced the importance of equal opportunities in sports and spurred institutions to address any discrepancies in funding, facilities, coaching, and other aspects of athletics. It encouraged greater investment in women's sports programs. Trump Administration (2017-2021): The Trump administration rescinded the Obama-era guidelines, stating that they didn't have the force of law and were overly prescriptive. The administration also proposed changes to the regulations governing how schools should handle sexual harassment and assault cases under Title IX. This change led to some uncertainty about how schools should approach Title IX compliance. Biden Administration (2021-present): The Biden administration has indicated a commitment to strengthening Title IX enforcement, particularly in addressing issues of sexual harassment and assault on campus. They have signaled support for survivor-centered policies and aim to address shortcomings in the handling of such cases. While specific impacts are still unfolding, the administration's focus on addressing sexual harassment and assault is expected to influence policies and practices on college campuses, potentially improving support for survivors and enhancing preventive measures.
Bibliography
Binkley, Collin, and Erica Hunzinger. "EXPLAINER: What is Title IX and what impact has it
had?" CityNews. Last modified June 20, 2022. https://toronto.citynews.ca/2022/06/20/explainer-what-is-title-ix-and-what-impact-has-it-had/.
Eckes, Suzanne, R. Shep Melnick, and Kimberly J. Robinson. "Reactions to the Biden
Administration’s Proposed Title IX Changes from Education Law Scholars." Brookings. Last modified June 27, 2023. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/reactions-to-the-biden-administrations-proposed-title-ix-changes-from-education-law-scholars/.
"History of title IX." Women's Sports Foundation. Last modified July 19, 2021.
Knott, Katherine. "New Title IX Regulations Delayed." Inside Higher Ed | Higher Education
News, Events and Jobs. Last modified May 30, 2023. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2023/05/30/new-title-ix-regulations-delayed.
Park, Jonathan. "Biden's Title IX Delay Endangers Students." Daily Trojan. Last modified
August 18, 2023. https://dailytrojan.com/opinion/2023/08/16/tite-ix-delay/.
Comentarii