Alexandra Brodsky Examines Judge Barrett’s Ruling in Doe v. Purdue and Its Implications for Students Seeking Title IX Protections

Alexandra Brodsky (‘16), Staff Attorney with Public Justice, published an article on Public Justice’s website discussing Judge Barrett’s dissent in Doe v. Purdue and the grave implications of invoking Title IX to pave an “anti-male bias” pathway to impunity (“Understanding Judge Barrett’s Opinion in Doe v. Purdue,” Sep. 24). “We feel strongly that students facing school discipline for any kind of misconduct, including sexual harassment, should be treated fairly. But Purdue’s Title IX ruling advances a different vision of justice in which a school or agency’s respect for victims’ civil rights is evidence of anti-male bias. And Purdue paves the way for courts to apply more lenient standards to discrimination claims brought by men and other dominant groups than courts have regularly applied to discrimination claims by marginalized victims, including women.”