KLLF Files Brief on Behalf of Nation’s Largest Anti-Sexual Violence Organization Asking U.S. Court of Appeals to Recognize Broad Title IX Remedies for Campus Sexual Assault Survivors

This week, KLLF filed a “friend of the court” brief on behalf of RAINN (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network), the nation’s largest anti-sexual violence organization, urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to adopt Title IX standards that reflect the broad range of educational deprivations faced by survivors of sexual violence who are left unprotected by their schools.

KLLF’s brief was filed in support of Plaintiff-Appellant Jane Doe, a sexual assault survivor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison ("UW”). Doe’s lawsuit alleges that UW expelled her assailant, a fellow student, and then reinstated him without implementing any protective measures for Doe’s safety. The lower court dismissed Doe’s claims under Title IX, which alleged that UW acted with deliberate indifference to known sexual harassment, under the misguided view that a plaintiff who demonstrates resiliency by keeping up her grades and class attendance cannot show that she has been deprived of educational opportunities as required to sue under Title IX.

In support of Doe, KLLF’s amicus brief argues that student-survivors who are given inadequate institutional protections in the face of severe sexual harassment frequently see no option but to withdraw from campus life. They are thus prevented from accessing extracurricular activities, student groups, libraries, and campus resources that are fundamental components of the holistic experience of higher education. KLLF’s brief argues that access to educational experiences outside of traditional classroom learning, has been shown empirically to benefit students’ growth and career opportunities and fuel connections to peers and faculty members. The curtailment of access to these resources—which are critical to the project of higher education—constitutes a severe educational deprivation under the plain language and legislative history of Title IX.

The brief urges that the district court’s decision, which limits analysis of a survivor’s experience to one or two arbitrary factors and conveys a message to survivors that any sign of resiliency may cost them the ability to vindicate their rights under Title IX, must be reversed.

Read a copy of the brief, written by KLLF’s David Lebowitz and Alyssa Isidoridy, here.