Terri Patraw: A Disturbing Title IX Case
Arizona State University is being sued under Title IX in the case J.K. v. Arizona Board of Regents.
On March 3, 2008, the ACLU Women’s Rights Project, joined by the ACLU of Arizona and six other leading women’s advocacy organizations, filed a brief as friends of the court in J.K. v. Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of a student who was raped in her dorm room by an Arizona State University football player. The brief argues to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona that ASU is liable under Title IX for the rape and for the related discrimination suffered by the plaintiff, because ASU knew that the football player in question was a serial sexual harasser. ASU had expelled the harasser for severe sexual harassment of multiple women at ASU over the summer, and then weeks later arranged to re-admit him – with no supervision -- to ASU and to the ASU dorms where he raped the plaintiff a few months later.
A university that turns a blind-eye to the violent behavior of a student places other students at risk. This case examines the responsibility of the university to protect other students from potential violence when it has knowledge of a student's abusive past.
This case caught my attention for several reasons...Title IX, student-athlete, alma mater, and the allowance of a violent student-athlete to stay on an athletic team and on campus despite a history of abusive behavior toward women. A certain local university should be paying close attention to this case and the liability they may have exposed themselves to by allowing an abusive student-athlete to remain in its' basketball program.
On March 3, 2008, the ACLU Women’s Rights Project, joined by the ACLU of Arizona and six other leading women’s advocacy organizations, filed a brief as friends of the court in J.K. v. Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of a student who was raped in her dorm room by an Arizona State University football player. The brief argues to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona that ASU is liable under Title IX for the rape and for the related discrimination suffered by the plaintiff, because ASU knew that the football player in question was a serial sexual harasser. ASU had expelled the harasser for severe sexual harassment of multiple women at ASU over the summer, and then weeks later arranged to re-admit him – with no supervision -- to ASU and to the ASU dorms where he raped the plaintiff a few months later.
A university that turns a blind-eye to the violent behavior of a student places other students at risk. This case examines the responsibility of the university to protect other students from potential violence when it has knowledge of a student's abusive past.
This case caught my attention for several reasons...Title IX, student-athlete, alma mater, and the allowance of a violent student-athlete to stay on an athletic team and on campus despite a history of abusive behavior toward women. A certain local university should be paying close attention to this case and the liability they may have exposed themselves to by allowing an abusive student-athlete to remain in its' basketball program.
Comments