Title IX College System Criticized for Failing Both Accused and Accusers

Colleges' systems for investigating allegations of sexual assault and rape are failing both victims and the accused, with lives reportedly ruined by poorly managed investigations, false allegations, and undertrained officials. These critiques come as the system, mandated by Title IX, faces heightened scrutiny following recent high-profile cases.

Under Title IX regulations, federally funded colleges are required to address claims of sexual harassment, violence, and retaliation through specialized Title IX offices. This framework, initially established in 1972 to prevent sex-based discrimination, was expanded in 2011 to include sexual violence and later revised in 2020 to require "live hearings." However, the application and execution of these regulations have become a point of contention.

Legal experts, alleged victims, and students who have been accused all point to systemic issues. A report reveals that a Cornell University student accused seven fraternity brothers of drugging and gang-raping her. One of the accused students alleged in a lawsuit that a panel member's inattention during a virtual hearing compromised his defense.

Beyond specific incidents, broader concerns include Title IX officers lacking adequate training, potential institutional bias, and investigations that can span months or even years. While federal law provides a baseline, universities maintain considerable discretion over their investigative processes, leading to significant variations in how cases are handled.

Currently, there is no national professional license or standardized examination for Title IX investigators. Training can be brief, available to individuals with any background, and its depth varies. Despite the life-altering decisions these officials make, there is no minimum requirement for training hours or frequency.

"Two schools can have identical facts in terms of a situation involving a sexual assault, but there can be different outcomes," said Megan Thomas, a New York-based sexual assault attorney. "Schools are making those decisions unilaterally."

Columbia University student Golda Daphna reported an alleged rape and abuse during her senior year in 2021. After a police investigation found no probable cause for arrest, she pursued a university investigation. Her experience involved numerous counter-complaints, including accusations that she had sexually assaulted her accuser. Under Title IX procedures, universities must assess counter-complaints, even if police dismiss the initial allegations. Daphna described the process as "an eye for an eye" and ultimately signed a mutual release of claims to resolve the dispute without a formal determination.

At Saddleback College in California, Aurora Knight believes university officials misinterpreted her son Marcus's social interactions as threatening. Marcus, who has autism and cerebral palsy, faced complaints of following students and unwanted physical contact. His mother argued that the school failed to account for his disabilities and that he was never given a hearing or the opportunity to cross-examine accusers. Despite the school initially considering suspension, Marcus received a written reprimand. A trial court initially agreed with his challenge to the process, but a California appeals court found the school's procedures sufficient given the lesser punishment.

A former member of the Corps of Cadets at Texas A&M University reported being sexually assaulted by a fellow cadet in 2024. She claims she was blamed for her drinking and warned about alcohol rehabilitation instead of receiving support. The official responsible for discipline failed to notify the Title IX office, a violation later substantiated by the university. When her case eventually reached the Title IX office, her alleged assailant filed a countercomplaint. She ultimately signed a resolution agreement to graduate, but believes the process impacted her health.

At Indiana University, Shailey Ostlund reported an alleged sexual assault in 2015. Her investigation took six months, significantly longer than the anticipated six weeks. Ostlund stated that university personnel changed frequently, communication was difficult, and much of her submitted evidence was redacted. Her alleged assailant, Chris Parker, was suspended for sexual assault but later completed his degree virtually after reportedly violating his suspension terms multiple times. Ostlund suspects that Parker's prominence in the local jazz community may have influenced the university's handling of the violations.

Dei Jags, who experienced a Title IX complaint at Xavier University, later became a Title IX officer herself. She was surprised to find she received only three days of training. "Nobody is qualified to be on a university conduct hearing, in my opinion, with that basic level of training," she said.

Experts like Kayleigh Baker, vice president for practice excellence at TNG Consulting, note that federal requirements for Title IX personnel do not always cover essential practical skills such as credibility assessments and trauma-informed interviewing. This lack of standardized, in-depth training and oversight leaves many students feeling that the system meant to protect them is flawed and inadequate.

"Title IX itself was just a s--t show, a mess," Ostlund stated, reflecting on her experience during a difficult period of her life where she felt unsupported by the process.