|
 |
Deep Dive
These lawsuits could change the stakes for higher ed
We're keeping track of high-profile legal cases that have important implications for colleges and universities.
The future of higher education may be decided in the courtroom. New
lawsuits — some of which could reach the Supreme Court — are poised to
fundamentally reshape higher education by challenging everything from
how colleges investigate sexual misconduct to whether they're doing
enough to protect students on campus.
"There's no question that higher education is now in a litigation
frenzy," said Peter Lake, a law professor at Stetson University. "We're
facing legal accountability that's almost unprecedented."
Complicating the picture is the top court's composition. Last year,
Justice Brett Kavanaugh cemented the bench’s conservative majority by
replacing former Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was considered a swing
vote. It's difficult to predict where each justice will land on key
issues, but higher education leaders should brace for change.
Below, we're keeping tabs on high-profile cases that could have implications for the sector.
Affirmative action
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
What you need to know:
Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), an anti-affirmative action group,
brought a lawsuit against Harvard University’s race-conscious
admissions policies in 2014. SFFA alleges Harvard’s admissions officers
hold Asian American applicants to a higher standard than other students.
Although there’s evidence to back up those claims, some argue the
architect of the lawsuit, SFFA President Edward Blum, is using Asian
American students to achieve his long-running goal of ending
affirmative action in all corners of the U.S.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito hinted that tactic might work in a
2016 dissent in which he argued that affirmative action policies have
the potential to discriminate against Asian Americans.
The case is awaiting a federal judge’s decision, but SFFA is keeping
busy in the meantime. The group has similar lawsuits pending against
the University of Texas at Austin and the University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill.
The latest:
A ruling is forthcoming from a three-week trial held on the matter last
fall. Appeals are likely, and legal experts say the case could end up
with the Supreme Court.
Affirmative action
Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina
What you need to know:
The group behind the lawsuit against Harvard University’s use of
affirmative action is also suing the University of North Carolina
System, its leaders and the Chapel Hill campus, alleging its admissions
process is unfair to white and Asian American students and favorable to
black and Hispanic students.
The allegations that UNC gives black and Hispanic students preferential
treatment is similar to previous challenges to affirmative action. In
that way, the lawsuit takes a different legal approach than the case
against Harvard, The New York Times reported. That may give it another
shot at reaching the Supreme Court.
The latest:
SFFA’s lawyers filed court documents earlier this year that allege
racial preferences accounted for the admission of almost 25% of
in-state Hispanic applicants and 42% of in-state black applicants. The
university denied denied those claims.
UNC and SFFA have each requested the federal judge overseeing the case rule in their favor without taking the case to trial.
Free speech
Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin
What you need to know:
After an Oberlin College student accused a local bakery of racial
profiling, fellow students, faculty and staff at the college rallied in
his support and launched protests. The bakery responded by suing the
college for libel and slander.
In June, the jury delivered a verdict in favor of the bakery, awarding
it $44 million in damages. Some legal scholars say the jury’s decision
could threaten First Amendment rights by scaring colleges into clamping
down on students’ speech out of fear of being held responsible for the
consequences.
The latest:
A judge reduced the damages to $25 million. Oberlin previously
indicated it had plans to appeal, but the judge is requiring the
college post a $36 million bond to avoid paying the damages while it
does so.
In August, Oberlin requested a new trial and for the judge to reverse the jury’s verdict, according to a local media report.
Greek life
Gruver v. State of Louisiana through the Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University
What you need to know:
A lawsuit filed in 2018 over a student’s death could impact how
colleges and universities are expected to handle complaints of hazing.
In 2017, an 18-year-old Louisiana State University freshman died from
alcohol poisoning after he was forced to drink lethal amounts during a
hazing ritual.
His parents are seeking $25 million in damages, alleging the university
didn’t do enough to crack down on fraternities that were hazing, even
though most had risk-management violations leading up to their son’s
death.
Meanwhile, the lawsuit contends, the university “aggressively” pursued
allegations of hazing against sororities while looking the other way
when confronted with similar allegations against fraternities. That
amounts to a violation of Title IX, the lawsuit contends, because it
minimizes “the hazing of males as ‘boys being boys’ engaging in
masculine rites of passage.”
The latest:
In late July, a judge rejected the university’s motion to dismiss the case.
Greek life
Sigma Alpha Epsilon, et al. v. Harvard University
What you need to know:
A lawsuit over single-gender student clubs could have big implications for the future of Greek organizations on campus.
In 2016, Harvard rolled out a policy meant to deter students from
joining exclusively male “final clubs” by barring members of all
unrecognized single-gender groups — including fraternities and
sororities — from holding campus leadership positions and receiving
some fellowships. Several Greek organizations have since alleged in
lawsuits that the policy violates gender-discrimination laws and their
right to free association.
The latest:
Harvard filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the policy
is gender-neutral and therefore does not discriminate based on sex.
In August, the judge presiding over the case partially rejected that
motion, writing that such a policy is “no less discriminatory or
motivated by sex simply because it applies equally to members of both
sexes.” He also dismissed some of the Greek organizations from the case
because they don’t have members enrolled in Harvard.
Immigration
Guilford College v. Nielsen
What you need to know:
More than 60 colleges have thrown their support behind a lawsuit
against a Trump administration policy that changed how “unlawful
presence” is calculated for nonimmigrant visa-holders, making it easier
to impose reentry bans on international students and scholars.
Colleges against the policy say it creates “significant and destructive
uncertainty” for visa programs, which will hamper their ability to
retain and recruit top international students.
The latest:
The colleges suing over the policy contend the government didn’t go
through the required rulemaking process and that the change is at odds
with current law. They’ve asked the judge to immediately issue a ruling
in their favor on those two counts.
Lawyers representing the government have likewise asked for a ruling in their favor without going to trial.
Immigration
Trump v. NAACP; McAleenan v. Vidal; Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California
What you need to know:
In 2017, the Trump administration attempted to phase out the Deferred
Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which lets nearly 700,000
immigrants who were illegally brought to the U.S. as children study and
work in two-year blocks. Officials argue the program was unlawful
because it was set up through executive order, but a handful of lower
courts have blocked the administration’s attempts to end the program.
Some 124,000 DACA recipients were enrolled in college as of September 2017, the Migration Policy Institute reported.
If DACA is revoked, those students would no longer be shielded from
deportation and could lose access to higher education. That’s because
several states bar undocumented students without DACA protections from
enrolling or paying in-state tuition rates, according to the Center for
American Progress.
The latest:
The Supreme Court agreed to take up the consolidated cases, with oral
arguments in November and a decision expected by mid-2020 over the
program’s fate.
Title IX
John Doe v. Michigan State University
What you need to know:
A suspended Michigan State University student accused of sexual assault
filed a first-of-its-kind class-action lawsuit against the school
alleging its policies did not provide due process. If the lawsuit
succeeds, it could overturn en masse universities’ sanctions against
accused students who didn’t have a live hearing or an opportunity for
cross-examination.
Another ruling in a similar case last year cleared the way for a
class-action lawsuit. In that case, a judge ruled that a University of
Michigan student accused of sexual assault had the right to a live
hearing in which he or an attorney could question his accuser, forcing
the college to revise its Title IX policies.
The latest:
The court must certify the case before it proceeds as a class-action
lawsuit. The university plans to file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
Title IX
John Doe v. University of California
What you need to know:
In August, two former U of California System students accused of sexual
misconduct filed a class-action lawsuit alleging the system’s Title IX
policies are unfair. They were denied their due process rights, they
contend, because they didn’t have an opportunity to cross-examine their
witnesses in front of a neutral factfinder.
The lawsuit came eight months after a California appeals court ruled
that the University of Southern California must let students accused of
sexual misconduct question their accusers and other witnesses during a
hearing in front of a neutral factfinder, which could not be the Title
IX investigator.
In the wake of the decision, the U of California and other institutions
in the state have revised their policies to meet the court’s
expectations. However, the lawsuit seeks to overturn sanctions against
hundreds of students found responsible for sexual misconduct under the
state system’s former Title IX policies.
The latest:
The lawsuit has yet to be class-action certified.
|
|
|
|
