Higher Ed Counsel & Strategic Solutions

Title VI issues continue to garner increased attention across higher education, making summer an important time for institutions to assess whether their policies are prepared for the year ahead. In addition to the risk of federal enforcement actions and lawsuits, student complaints, programming disputes, harassment allegations, bias incidents, and questions about institutional response can all test the clarity and adequacy of a campus policy framework.

Summer is a critical time for reviewing Title IX policies and procedures before the start of a new academic year. When students return, institutions need more than technically compliant language. They need policies that are current, internally consistent, and practical for the employees responsible for implementing them. Because Title IX obligations affect reporting, response, supportive measures, investigations, resolution processes, and training, even small policy gaps can create confusion at sensitive moments.

Summer is the ideal time to revisit and revise student conduct policies before orientation and move-in begin. Conduct systems sit at the intersection of legal compliance, institutional values, and student expectations. When policies are outdated, unclear, or inconsistent with legal requirements or campus practice, problems can arise quickly. A well-timed summer review helps institutions confirm that their conduct framework is not only compliant with the law, but also understandable to students, workable for student affairs staff, and better positioned to withstand legal and public scrutiny when difficult cases emerge.

In recent years, the use of the term “rapist” on campus has sparked significant legal debate in Title IX higher education cases. Two notable cases, Nungesser v. Columbia University and the more recently decided Doe v. University of Maryland, provide contrasting judicial perspectives on this issue. In this legal update, we examine these cases, focusing on their legal reasoning, outcomes, and implications for educational institutions.

K-12 schools and institutions of higher education should be keenly aware of the laws and best practices for engagement with minors (i.e., persons under the age of 18).  Teachers, non-instructional staff, coaches, and volunteers in every school district interact with minors on a daily basis.  In higher ed, faculty, staff, and even college students themselves regularly interact with minors in the context of collegiate athletics and recruiting; college and university admissions programs; and summer school sessions and internships for high-school students.