More Title IX and the Courts

Newsweek carries an article about a Title IX (sexual assault) case from Johns Hopkins University in which a student was "convicted" and suspended, but won a court decision that essentially said due process had not been provided. Oddly, the article focuses on the fact that when the US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by the university, Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself but did not say why.

However, the "why" was obvious. She had participated in a lower court's opinion in the case before becoming a member of the Supreme Court.

What is of interest in the case was it provides yet another example of something we have discussed in the past: external courts look for due process as they understand due process in evaluating university procedures. And we have noted that UC, and many other universities with union contracts, have long had grievance and arbitration procedures that external courts will defer to because - while such procedures may be less formal than those of courts, they provide basic due process. From Newsweek:

...In a decision siding with the [accused] student, the appeals court agreed that the university violated his right to due process and engaged in gender discrimination under Title IX. In an opinion and order authored by Barrett, the panel said it was "plausible" that Purdue's investigation panel "chose to believe Jane [Doe] because she is a woman and to disbelieve John because he is a man." ...

Full story at https://www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-refuses-take-amy-coney-barrett-case-1885574.