Jeff Lowe

Research Proposal and Planning

In 2011 the Office for Civil Rights sent the “Dear Colleague” letter to all schools and universities

receiving federal funding in the United States. Three years later a Q&A would sent to help

answer questions that were raised as a result of the DCL. These letter were not new policies but

instead gave extensive guidance about how universities should carry out their grievance

procedures for cases that fall under Title IX such as sexual harassment and sexual violence.

● The three focal points of the letter pertained to the standard of evidence that would

warrant a case, the appeals process, and cross examination

○ Preponderance of evidence is used to determine if an investigation will be carried

out.

■ “More likely than not”

■ Is the only appropriate standard of evidence--using another standard will

result in a loss of funding

■ Favors the complainant

○ Appealing must be available to both sides

■ the respondent may have to face the same trial twice which is an

infringement on due process

○ Strongly discouraged that either party be allowed to cross-examine the other

■ Does not allow for a proper legal interrogation

Due Process
 ● 14th Amendment protects citizens against state action. Schools are state actors. One of

the protections that citizens have against the state is due process. “No person shall be

deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law”. Students can show

that they had the liberty to obtain an education and future opportunities but a case has

taken the opportunity away from them. Public education is a property interested that is

protected by the 14th amendment. As a result, students are entitled to due process in Title

IX cases.

● There are several critiques on the guidance given by the OCR particularly to how the

respondent is disadvantaged to how the policy is set up and enforced.

○ Preponderance of evidence

○ Training about survivors

○ Is the possible loss of federal funding a form of coercion?

○ Should the respondent be tried for the same violation twice?

I want to explore the critiques to these three policies emphasized by the OCR and how

the complainant, respondent, and university are affected by these policies. Is Title IX effectively

respecting the 5th and 14th amendment rights of student? And is Title IX in place to be a form of

criminal justice or ensure a safe environment on campuses?