Schiebel v. Schoharie Central School District
This appeal arose out of a male instructor’s Title IX lawsuit alleging that Schoharie Central School District, in New York, discriminated against him based on his sex when it disciplined him for allegedly touching a student’s breasts and buttocks. Keith Schiebel was an independent contractor who provided educational instruction at the School District. After a student accused him of inappropriately touching her, the School District investigated, substantiated the allegation, and refused to permit him to continue teaching. In a subsequent lawsuit, Schiebel claimed that the School District had engaged in a faulty investigation and had erroneously concluded that he assaulted the complaining student because of anti-male bias. A district court granted the School District’s motion to dismiss the case. The district court held that independent contractors like Schiebel can bring Title IX lawsuits, but concluded that Schiebel failed to allege that the School District had engaged in anti-male discrimination. Schiebel appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Public Justice filed an amicus brief. The amicus brief argued that Title IX’s broad language—which protects all “persons” from sex discrimination in education—reaches independent contractors like Schiebel. Public Justice cited cases in which it had previously argued successfully that independent contractors can bring Title IX lawsuits.
The amicus brief also argued that Schiebel failed to allege sex-based bias by the School District—a necessary element of a Title IX claim. Specifically, the amicus brief argued that, contrary to Schiebel’s allegations, public efforts to support victims of sexual harassment do not demonstrate anti-male bias. Nor, without more, do procedural missteps in a school’s investigation. And if a school favors a person who reports sexual harassment over a person accused of it, that may show bias in favor of victims, but not necessarily bias against men.
In addition, the amicus brief explained that if the court were to allow Schiebel’s sex discrimination claim to proceed, that would create perverse incentives for schools to sweep sexual harassment under the rug. After all, victims of sexual harassment face an uphill battle in making Title IX claims. So, if it is unusually easy for a person accused of sexual harassment to bring a claim, and unusually hard for victims to bring suits, schools may decide to ignore harassment despite evidence. That would hurt people of all genders: Many more men and boys are victims of sexual harassment at school than are disciplined for being perpetrators of sexual harassment.
The Court of Appeals has yet to issue a ruling in this case.
