In a split decision, a fully constituted panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has reestablished a former University of Arizona student’s Title IX lawsuit against the institution. This decision has vacated a divided three-judge panel’s opinion that previously approved the summary judgment for the university. The announcement held that the student, Mackenzie Brown, put forth adequate evidence for a trial concerning whether the university exercised adequate control over the off-campus apartment where she was assaulted.
What distinguishes this case is that it is potentially setting a legal precedent for universities to be held responsible under Title IX for off-campus incidents. Title IX is a federal civil rights law in the United States, which pertains to any educational program or activity that receives Federal government financial support. It states: “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”.
Despite the off-campus location of the incident, the en banc panel deemed the provided evidence worthy of a trial, suggesting the potential extent of a university’s control, and by extension its responsibilities, may exceed the geographical boundaries of the campus. This development might reshape the way universities approach and handle cases of assault, leading them to reconsider and likely tighten their safety and oversight policies.
This topic of potential expanded liability is of utmost importance to legal professionals working in the educational field as well as universities’ legal departments. The courts will further examine the reach of Title IX boundaries, adding a new and significant complexity to how educational institutions anticipate and manage related litigations.
For more detailed information on this development, refer to the full coverage on JD Supra.