davis
next
friend
lashonda
monroe
county
board
education
et
argued
january
decided
may
petitioner
filed
suit
respondents
county
school
board
board
school
officials
seeking
damages
sexual
harassment
daughter
lashonda
classmate
public
elementary
school
among
things
petitioner
alleged
respondents
deliberate
indifference
persistent
sexual
advances
toward
lashonda
created
intimidating
hostile
offensive
abusive
school
environment
violated
title
ix
education
amendments
relevant
part
prohibits
student
excluded
participation
ing
denied
benefits
ing
subjected
discrimination
education
program
activity
receiving
federal
financial
assistance
granting
respondents
motion
dismiss
federal
district
found
peer
harassment
provides
ground
title
ix
private
cause
action
damages
en
banc
eleventh
circuit
affirmed
held
private
title
ix
damages
action
may
lie
school
board
cases
harassment
funding
recipient
deliberately
indifferent
sexual
harassment
recipient
actual
knowledge
harassment
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
said
deprive
victims
access
educational
opportunities
benefits
provided
school
pp
implied
private
right
action
money
damages
exists
title
ix
franklin
gwinnett
county
public
schools
funding
recipients
adequate
notice
liable
conduct
issue
pennhurst
state
school
hospital
halderman
recipient
liable
misconduct
petitioner
attempts
hold
board
liable
decision
remain
idle
face
known
harassment
schools
standard
set
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
school
district
may
liable
damages
title
ix
deliberately
indifferent
known
acts
sexual
harassment
also
applies
cases
harassment
initially
gebser
expressly
rejected
use
agency
principles
impute
liability
district
acts
teachers
additionally
title
ix
regulatory
scheme
long
provided
funding
recipients
notice
may
liable
failure
respond
discriminatory
acts
common
law
also
put
schools
notice
may
held
responsible
state
law
failing
protect
students
third
parties
tortious
acts
course
harasser
identity
irrelevant
deliberate
indifference
makes
sense
direct
liability
theory
recipient
authority
take
remedial
action
title
ix
language
narrowly
circumscribes
circumstances
giving
rise
damages
liability
statute
recipient
engage
harassment
directly
may
liable
damages
unless
deliberate
indifference
subject
students
harassment
minimum
causes
students
undergo
harassment
makes
liable
vulnerable
moreover
harassment
must
occur
operations
recipient
harassment
must
take
place
context
subject
school
district
control
factors
combine
limit
recipient
damages
liability
circumstances
wherein
recipient
exercises
substantial
control
harasser
context
known
harassment
occurs
misconduct
occurs
school
hours
school
grounds
misconduct
taking
place
operation
recipient
circumstances
recipient
retains
substantial
control
context
harassment
occurs
importantly
setting
board
exercises
significant
control
harasser
disciplinary
authority
students
time
events
publication
school
attorneys
administrators
indicated
harassment
trigger
title
ix
liability
subsequent
department
education
policy
guidelines
provide
harassment
falls
within
title
ix
scope
contrary
contentions
respondents
dissent
school
administrators
continue
enjoy
flexibility
require
making
disciplinary
decisions
long
funding
recipients
deemed
deliberately
indifferent
acts
harassment
recipient
response
harassment
lack
thereof
clearly
unreasonable
light
known
circumstances
pp
requirement
recipients
receive
adequate
notice
title
ix
proscriptions
also
bears
proper
definition
discrimination
private
damages
action
title
ix
proscribes
sexual
harassment
sufficient
clarity
satisfy
pennhurst
notice
requirement
serve
basis
damages
action
see
gebser
supra
previously
held
harassment
discrimination
school
context
title
ix
constrained
conclude
sexual
harassment
sufficiently
severe
likewise
rise
level
discrimination
actionable
statute
statute
prohibitions
help
give
content
discrimination
context
statute
protects
students
discrimination
also
shields
excluded
participation
denied
benefits
recipient
education
program
activity
basis
gender
necessary
show
overt
physical
deprivation
access
school
resources
make
damages
claim
sexual
harassment
title
ix
plaintiff
must
show
harassment
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
undermines
detracts
victims
educational
experience
victims
effectively
denied
equal
access
institution
resources
opportunities
cf
meritor
savings
bank
fsb
vinson
whether
conduct
harassment
depends
constellation
surrounding
circumstances
expectations
relationships
oncale
sundowner
offshore
services
including
limited
harasser
victim
ages
number
persons
involved
courts
must
also
bear
mind
schoolchildren
may
regularly
interact
ways
unacceptable
among
adults
moreover
discrimination
must
occur
education
program
activity
suggests
behavior
must
serious
enough
systemic
effect
denying
victim
equal
access
education
program
activity
single
instance
severe
peer
harassment
theory
said
systemic
effect
unlikely
congress
thought
fact
teacher
engaged
harassment
franklin
gebser
relevant
peer
harassment
less
likely
satisfy
requirements
misconduct
breach
title
ix
guarantee
equal
access
educational
benefits
systemic
effect
program
activity
pp
applying
standard
facts
issue
eleventh
circuit
erred
dismissing
petitioner
complaint
say
beyond
doubt
prove
set
facts
entitle
relief
alleges
lashonda
victim
repeated
acts
harassment
period
allegations
support
conclusion
misconduct
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
moreover
complaint
alleges
multiple
victims
misconduct
sought
audience
school
principal
harassment
concrete
negative
effect
lashonda
ability
receive
education
complaint
also
suggests
petitioner
may
able
show
actual
knowledge
deliberate
indifference
part
board
made
effort
either
investigate
put
end
harassment
pp
reversed
remanded
delivered
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
kennedy
filed
dissenting
opinion
rehnquist
scalia
homas
joined
aurelia
davis
next
friend
shonda
petitioner
monroe
county
board
education
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
may
justice
delivered
opinion
petitioner
brought
suit
monroe
county
board
education
defendants
alleging
daughter
victim
sexual
harassment
another
student
class
among
petitioner
claims
claim
monetary
injunctive
relief
title
ix
education
amendments
title
ix
stat
amended
et
seq
district
dismissed
petitioner
title
ix
claim
ground
peer
harassment
provides
ground
private
cause
action
statute
appeals
eleventh
circuit
sitting
en
banc
affirmed
consider
whether
private
damages
action
may
lie
school
board
cases
harassment
conclude
may
funding
recipient
acts
deliberate
indifference
known
acts
harassment
programs
activities
moreover
conclude
action
lie
harassment
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
effectively
bars
victim
access
educational
opportunity
benefit
petitioner
title
ix
claim
dismissed
federal
rule
civil
procedure
failure
state
claim
upon
relief
granted
accordingly
reviewing
legal
sufficiency
petitioner
cause
action
must
assume
truth
material
facts
alleged
complaint
summit
health
pinhas
petitioner
minor
daughter
lashonda
allegedly
victim
prolonged
pattern
sexual
harassment
one
classmates
hubbard
elementary
school
public
school
monroe
county
georgia
according
petitioner
complaint
harassment
began
december
classmate
attempted
touch
lashonda
breasts
genital
area
made
vulgar
statements
want
get
bed
want
feel
boobs
complaint
similar
conduct
allegedly
occurred
january
january
ibid
lashonda
reported
incidents
mother
classroom
teacher
diane
fort
ibid
petitioner
turn
also
contacted
fort
allegedly
assured
petitioner
school
principal
bill
querry
informed
incidents
ibid
petitioner
contends
notwithstanding
reports
disciplinary
action
taken
id
conduct
allegedly
continued
many
months
early
february
purportedly
placed
door
stop
pants
proceeded
act
sexually
suggestive
manner
toward
lashonda
physical
education
class
id
lashonda
reported
behavior
physical
education
teacher
whit
maples
ibid
approximately
one
week
later
allegedly
engaged
harassing
behavior
time
supervision
another
classroom
teacher
joyce
pippin
id
lashonda
allegedly
reported
incident
teacher
petitioner
contacted
teacher
follow
ibid
petitioner
alleges
directed
sexually
harassing
conduct
toward
lashonda
physical
education
class
early
march
lashonda
reported
incident
maples
pippen
id
allegedly
rubbed
body
lashonda
school
hallway
lashonda
considered
sexually
suggestive
manner
lashonda
reported
matter
fort
id
string
incidents
finally
ended
charged
pleaded
guilty
sexual
battery
misconduct
id
complaint
alleges
lashonda
suffered
months
harassment
however
specifically
previously
high
grades
allegedly
dropped
became
unable
concentrate
studies
id
april
father
discovered
written
suicide
note
ibid
complaint
alleges
one
point
lashonda
told
petitioner
know
much
longer
keep
id
lashonda
victim
alleged
girls
class
fell
prey
conduct
id
one
point
fact
group
composed
lashonda
female
students
tried
speak
principal
querry
behavior
id
according
complaint
however
teacher
denied
students
request
statement
querry
wants
call
ibid
petitioner
alleges
disciplinary
action
taken
response
behavior
toward
lashonda
id
addition
conversations
fort
pippen
petitioner
alleges
spoke
principal
querry
petitioner
inquired
action
school
intended
take
querry
simply
stated
guess
threaten
little
bit
harder
id
yet
petitioner
alleges
point
many
months
reported
misconduct
disciplined
harassment
id
indeed
querry
allegedly
asked
petitioner
lashonda
one
complaining
id
according
complaint
effort
made
separate
lashonda
id
contrary
notwithstanding
lashonda
frequent
complaints
three
months
reported
harassment
even
permitted
change
classroom
seat
longer
seated
next
id
moreover
petitioner
alleges
time
events
question
monroe
county
board
education
board
instructed
personnel
respond
peer
sexual
harassment
established
policy
issue
id
may
petitioner
filed
suit
district
middle
district
georgia
board
charles
dumas
school
district
superintendent
principal
querry
complaint
alleged
board
recipient
federal
funding
purposes
title
ix
persistent
sexual
advances
harassment
student
upon
lashonda
interfered
ability
attend
school
perform
studies
activities
deliberate
indifference
defendants
unwelcome
sexual
advances
student
upon
lashonda
created
intimidating
hostile
offensive
abus
ive
school
environment
violation
title
ix
id
complaint
sought
compensatory
punitive
damages
attorney
fees
injunctive
relief
id
defendants
respondents
moved
dismiss
petitioner
complaint
federal
rule
civil
procedure
failure
state
claim
upon
relief
granted
district
granted
respondents
motion
see
supp
md
regard
petitioner
claims
title
ix
dismissed
claims
individual
defendants
ground
federally
funded
educational
institutions
subject
liability
private
causes
action
title
ix
id
board
concluded
title
ix
provided
basis
liability
absent
allegation
board
employee
board
role
harassment
ibid
petitioner
appealed
district
decision
dismissing
title
ix
claim
board
panel
appeals
eleventh
circuit
reversed
borrowing
title
vii
law
majority
panel
determined
harassment
stated
cause
action
board
title
ix
conclude
title
vii
encompasses
claim
damages
due
sexually
hostile
working
environment
created
tolerated
employer
title
ix
encompasses
claim
damages
due
sexually
hostile
educational
environment
created
fellow
student
students
supervising
authorities
knowingly
fail
act
eliminate
harassment
id
eleventh
circuit
panel
recognized
petitioner
sought
state
claim
based
school
officials
failure
take
action
stop
offensive
acts
officials
exercised
control
ibid
concluded
petitioner
alleged
facts
sufficient
support
claim
hostile
environment
sexual
harassment
theory
id
eleventh
circuit
granted
board
motion
rehearing
en
banc
affirmed
district
decision
dismiss
petitioner
title
ix
claim
board
en
banc
relied
primarily
theory
title
ix
passed
pursuant
congress
legislative
authority
constitution
spending
clause
art
cl
statute
therefore
must
provide
potential
recipients
federal
education
funding
unambiguous
notice
conditions
assuming
accept
title
ix
reasoned
provides
recipients
notice
must
stop
employees
engaging
discriminatory
conduct
statute
fails
provide
recipient
sufficient
notice
duty
prevent
harassment
id
writing
dissent
four
judges
urged
statute
declining
identify
perpetrator
discrimination
encompasses
misconduct
third
parties
identity
perpetrator
simply
irrelevant
language
statute
id
barkett
dissenting
plain
language
dissenters
reasoned
also
provides
recipients
sufficient
notice
failure
respond
harassment
trigger
liability
district
id
granted
certiorari
order
resolve
conflict
circuits
whether
circumstances
recipient
federal
educational
funds
liable
private
damages
action
arising
sexual
harassment
compare
case
rowinsky
bryan
independent
school
dist
holding
private
damages
action
harassment
available
title
ix
funding
recipient
responds
claims
differently
based
gender
victim
cert
denied
doe
university
illinois
upholding
private
damages
action
title
ix
funding
recipient
inadequate
response
known
harassment
cert
pending
brzonkala
virginia
polytechnic
institute
state
university
vacated
district
decision
affirmed
en
banc
addressing
merits
title
ix
hostile
environment
sexual
harassment
claim
directing
district
hold
claim
abeyance
pending
decision
instant
case
oona
mccaffrey
rejecting
qualified
immunity
claim
concluding
title
ix
duty
respond
harassment
clearly
established
cert
pending
reverse
ii
title
ix
provides
certain
exceptions
issue
person
shall
basis
sex
excluded
participation
denied
benefits
subjected
discrimination
education
program
activity
receiving
federal
financial
assistance
congress
authorized
administrative
enforcement
scheme
title
ix
federal
departments
agencies
authority
provide
financial
assistance
entrusted
promulgate
rules
regulations
orders
enforce
objectives
see
departments
agencies
may
rely
means
authorized
law
including
termination
funding
ibid
give
effect
statute
restrictions
dispute
board
recipient
federal
education
funding
title
ix
purposes
respondents
support
argument
harassment
rise
level
discrimination
purposes
title
ix
rather
issue
question
whether
recipient
federal
education
funding
may
liable
damages
title
ix
circumstances
discrimination
form
sexual
harassment
petitioner
urges
title
ix
plain
language
compels
conclusion
statute
intended
bar
recipients
federal
funding
permitting
form
discrimination
programs
activities
emphasizes
statute
prohibits
student
subjected
discrimination
education
program
activity
receiving
federal
financial
assistance
emphasis
supplied
title
ix
unmistakable
focus
benefited
class
cannon
university
chicago
rather
perpetrator
petitioner
view
compels
conclusion
statute
works
protect
students
discriminatory
misconduct
peers
however
asked
define
scope
behavior
title
ix
proscribes
must
determine
whether
district
failure
respond
harassment
schools
support
private
suit
money
damages
see
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
dist
case
petitioners
seek
establish
title
ix
violation
recover
damages
indeed
recognized
implied
private
right
action
title
ix
see
cannon
university
chicago
supra
held
money
damages
available
suits
franklin
gwinnett
county
public
schools
repeatedly
treated
title
ix
legislation
enacted
pursuant
congress
authority
spending
clause
however
see
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
dist
supra
title
ix
franklin
gwinnett
county
public
schools
supra
title
ix
see
also
guardians
assn
civil
serv
new
york
city
opinion
white
title
vi
private
damages
actions
available
recipients
federal
funding
adequate
notice
liable
conduct
issue
congress
acts
pursuant
spending
power
generates
legislation
much
nature
contract
return
federal
funds
agree
comply
federally
imposed
conditions
pennhurst
state
school
hospital
halderman
interpreting
language
spending
legislation
thus
insis
congress
speak
clear
voice
recognizing
course
knowing
acceptance
terms
putative
contract
state
unaware
conditions
imposed
legislation
unable
ascertain
expected
ibid
see
also
id
invoking
pennhurst
respondents
urge
title
ix
provides
notice
recipients
federal
educational
funds
liable
damages
harm
arising
harassment
respondents
contend
specifically
statute
proscribes
misconduct
grant
recipients
third
parties
respondents
argue
moreover
contrary
purpose
spending
clause
legislation
impose
liability
funding
recipient
misconduct
third
parties
recipients
exercise
little
control
see
also
rowinsky
bryan
independent
school
dist
agree
respondents
recipient
federal
funds
may
liable
damages
title
ix
misconduct
recipient
must
exclud
persons
participation
den
persons
benefits
subjec
persons
discrimination
program
activit
ies
order
liable
title
ix
government
enforcement
power
may
exercised
funding
recipient
see
extended
damages
liability
title
ix
parties
outside
scope
power
see
national
collegiate
athletic
assn
smith
slip
rejecting
suggestion
private
right
action
available
potentially
broader
government
enforcement
authority
cf
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
dist
supra
unsound
think
statute
express
system
enforcement
require
notice
recipient
opportunity
come
voluntary
compliance
judicially
implied
system
enforcement
permits
substantial
liability
without
regard
recipient
knowledge
corrective
actions
upon
receiving
notice
disagree
respondents
assertion
however
petitioner
seeks
hold
board
liable
actions
instead
petitioner
attempts
hold
board
liable
decision
remain
idle
face
known
harassment
schools
gebser
concluded
recipient
federal
education
funds
may
liable
damages
title
ix
deliberately
indifferent
known
acts
sexual
harassment
teacher
case
teacher
entered
sexual
relationship
eighth
grade
student
student
sought
damages
title
ix
teacher
misconduct
recognized
scope
liability
private
damages
actions
title
ix
circumscribed
pennhurst
requirement
funding
recipients
notice
potential
liability
invoking
pennhurst
guardians
assn
franklin
gebser
required
receiving
entity
federal
funds
notice
liable
monetary
subjecting
damages
liability
id
quoting
franklin
gwinnett
county
public
schools
also
recognized
however
limitation
private
damages
actions
bar
liability
funding
recipient
intentionally
violates
statute
id
see
also
guardians
assn
civil
serv
new
york
city
supra
opinion
white
respect
title
vi
particular
concluded
pennhurst
bar
private
damages
action
title
ix
funding
recipient
engages
intentional
conduct
violates
clear
terms
statute
accordingly
rejected
use
agency
principles
impute
liability
district
misconduct
teachers
likewise
declined
invitation
impose
liability
amounted
negligence
standard
holding
district
liable
failure
react
harassment
knew
known
ibid
rather
concluded
district
liable
damages
district
intentionally
acted
clear
violation
title
ix
remaining
deliberately
indifferent
acts
harassment
actual
knowledge
id
contrary
dissent
suggestion
misconduct
teacher
gebser
treated
grant
recipient
actions
post
liability
arose
rather
official
decision
recipient
remedy
violation
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
dist
supra
employing
deliberate
indifference
theory
already
used
establish
municipal
liability
rev
stat
see
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
dist
supra
citing
board
bryan
cty
brown
canton
harris
concluded
gebser
recipients
liable
damages
deliberate
indifference
effectively
cause
discrimination
see
also
canton
harris
supra
recognizing
municipality
liable
municipality
causes
constitutional
violation
issue
emphasis
original
high
standard
imposed
gebser
sought
eliminate
risk
recipient
liable
damages
official
decision
instead
employees
independent
actions
gebser
thus
established
recipient
intentionally
violates
title
ix
subject
private
damages
action
recipient
deliberately
indifferent
known
acts
discrimination
indeed
whether
viewed
discrimination
subject
ing
students
discrimination
title
ix
nquestionably
placed
board
duty
permit
harassment
schools
franklin
gwinnett
county
public
schools
supra
recipients
violate
title
ix
plain
terms
remain
deliberately
indifferent
form
misconduct
consider
whether
misconduct
identified
gebser
deliberate
indifference
known
acts
harassment
amounts
intentional
violation
title
ix
capable
supporting
private
damages
action
harasser
student
rather
teacher
conclude
certain
limited
circumstances
initial
matter
gebser
expressly
rejected
use
agency
principles
title
ix
context
noting
textual
differences
title
ix
title
vii
cf
faragher
boca
raton
invoking
agency
principles
ground
definition
employer
title
vii
includes
agents
employer
meritor
savings
bank
fsb
vinson
additionally
regulatory
scheme
surrounding
title
ix
long
provided
funding
recipients
notice
may
liable
failure
respond
discriminatory
acts
certain
department
education
requires
recipients
monitor
third
parties
discrimination
specified
circumstances
refrain
particular
forms
interaction
outside
entities
known
discriminate
see
cfr
common
law
put
schools
notice
may
held
responsible
state
law
failure
protect
students
tortious
acts
third
parties
see
restatement
second
torts
comment
fact
state
courts
routinely
uphold
claims
alleging
schools
negligent
failing
protect
students
torts
peers
see
rupp
bryant
brahatcek
millard
school
dist
neb
mcleod
grant
county
school
dist
say
identity
harasser
irrelevant
contrary
deliberate
indifference
standard
language
title
ix
narrowly
circumscribe
set
parties
whose
known
acts
sexual
harassment
trigger
duty
respond
part
funding
recipients
deliberate
indifference
makes
sense
theory
direct
liability
title
ix
funding
recipient
control
alleged
harassment
recipient
directly
liable
indifference
lacks
authority
take
remedial
action
language
title
ix
particularly
viewed
conjunction
requirement
recipient
notice
title
ix
prohibitions
liable
damages
also
cabins
range
misconduct
statute
proscribes
statute
plain
language
confines
scope
prohibited
conduct
based
recipient
degree
control
harasser
environment
harassment
occurs
funding
recipient
engage
harassment
directly
may
liable
damages
unless
deliberate
indifference
subject
students
harassment
deliberate
indifference
must
minimum
cause
students
undergo
harassment
make
liable
vulnerable
random
house
dictionary
english
language
defining
subject
cause
undergo
action
something
specified
expose
make
liable
vulnerable
lay
open
expose
webster
third
new
international
dictionary
english
language
defining
subject
cause
undergo
submit
make
submit
particular
action
effect
expose
moreover
harassment
must
occur
operations
funding
recipient
see
defining
program
activity
harassment
must
take
place
context
subject
school
district
control
webster
third
new
international
dictionary
english
language
supra
defining
condition
subjection
regulation
subordination
subject
guidance
instruction
random
house
dictionary
english
language
supra
defining
subject
authority
direction
supervision
factors
combine
limit
recipient
damages
liability
circumstances
wherein
recipient
exercises
substantial
control
harasser
context
known
harassment
occurs
recipient
said
expose
students
harassment
cause
undergo
recipient
programs
agree
dissent
conditions
satisfied
easily
obviously
offender
agent
recipient
post
rejected
use
agency
analysis
gebser
however
disagree
term
somehow
imports
agency
requirement
title
ix
see
ibid
noted
theory
gebser
recipient
directly
liable
deliberate
indifference
discrimination
see
supra
liability
case
arise
teacher
actions
treated
funding
recipient
post
district
directly
liable
failure
act
terms
subjec
impose
limits
nothing
terms
requires
use
agency
principles
misconduct
occurs
school
hours
school
grounds
bulk
misconduct
fact
took
place
classroom
misconduct
taking
place
operation
funding
recipient
see
doe
university
illinois
finding
liability
school
fails
respond
properly
sexual
harassment
takes
place
students
involved
school
activities
otherwise
supervision
school
employees
circumstances
recipient
retains
substantial
control
context
harassment
occurs
importantly
however
setting
board
exercises
significant
control
harasser
observed
example
nature
state
power
public
schoolchildren
custodial
tutelary
permitting
degree
supervision
control
exercised
free
adults
vernonia
school
dist
acton
one
occasion
recognized
importance
school
officials
comprehensive
authority
consistent
fundamental
constitutional
safeguards
prescribe
control
conduct
schools
tinker
des
moines
independent
community
school
dist
see
also
new
jersey
maintenance
discipline
schools
requires
students
restrained
assaulting
one
another
abusing
drugs
alcohol
committing
crimes
also
students
conform
standards
conduct
prescribed
school
authorities
ability
control
influence
behavior
exists
even
greater
extent
classroom
workplace
common
law
recognizes
school
disciplinary
authority
see
restatement
second
torts
thus
conclude
recipients
federal
funding
may
liable
subject
ing
students
discrimination
recipient
deliberately
indifferent
known
acts
sexual
harassment
harasser
school
disciplinary
authority
time
events
question
fact
school
attorneys
administrators
told
harassment
trigger
liability
title
ix
march
even
events
alleged
petitioner
complaint
unfolding
national
school
boards
association
issued
publication
use
school
attorneys
administrators
understanding
law
regarding
sexual
harassment
employees
students
observed
districts
liable
title
ix
failure
respond
harassment
see
national
school
boards
association
council
school
attorneys
sexual
harassment
schools
preventing
defending
claims
rev
drawing
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
guidelines
interpreting
title
vii
publication
informed
districts
school
district
constructive
notice
severe
repeated
acts
sexual
harassment
fellow
students
may
form
basis
itle
ix
claim
id
publication
even
correctly
anticipated
form
gebser
actual
notice
requirement
unlikely
courts
hold
school
district
liable
sexual
harassment
students
students
absence
actual
knowledge
notice
district
employees
sexual
harassment
schools
supra
although
rely
publication
indicium
congressional
notice
see
post
find
support
reading
title
ix
fact
school
attorneys
rendered
analogous
interpretation
likewise
although
promulgated
late
contribute
board
notice
proscribed
misconduct
department
education
office
civil
rights
ocr
recently
adopted
policy
guidelines
providing
harassment
falls
within
scope
title
ix
proscriptions
see
department
education
office
civil
rights
sexual
harassment
guidance
harassment
students
school
employees
students
third
parties
fed
reg
ocr
title
ix
guidelines
see
also
department
education
racial
incidents
harassment
students
educational
institutions
fed
reg
stress
conclusion
recipients
may
liable
deliberate
indifference
known
acts
peer
sexual
harassment
mean
recipients
avoid
liability
purging
schools
actionable
peer
harassment
administrators
must
engage
particular
disciplinary
action
thus
disagree
respondents
contention
title
ix
provides
cause
action
harassment
nothing
short
expulsion
every
student
accused
misconduct
involving
sexual
overtones
protect
school
systems
liability
damages
see
brief
respondents
see
also
tjoflat
school
must
immediately
suspend
expel
student
accused
sexual
harassment
likewise
dissent
erroneously
imagines
victims
peer
harassment
title
ix
right
make
particular
remedial
demands
see
post
contemplating
victim
demand
new
desk
assignment
fact
previously
noted
courts
refrain
second
guessing
disciplinary
decisions
made
school
administrators
new
jersey
supra
school
administrators
continue
enjoy
flexibility
require
long
funding
recipients
deemed
deliberately
indifferent
acts
harassment
recipient
response
harassment
lack
thereof
clearly
unreasonable
light
known
circumstances
dissent
consistently
mischaracterizes
standard
require
funding
recipients
remedy
peer
harassment
post
ensur
students
conform
conduct
certain
rules
post
title
ix
imposes
requirements
contrary
recipient
must
merely
respond
known
peer
harassment
manner
clearly
unreasonable
mere
reasonableness
standard
dissent
assumes
see
post
appropriate
case
reason
courts
motion
dismiss
summary
judgment
directed
verdict
identify
response
clearly
unreasonable
matter
law
like
dissent
see
post
acknowledge
school
administrators
shoulder
substantial
burdens
result
legal
constraints
disciplinary
authority
extent
restrictions
arise
federal
statutes
congress
review
burdens
attention
difficult
position
legislation
may
place
nation
schools
believe
however
standard
set
sufficiently
flexible
account
level
disciplinary
authority
available
school
potential
liability
arising
certain
forms
disciplinary
action
university
might
example
expected
exercise
degree
control
students
grade
school
enjoy
see
post
entirely
reasonable
school
refrain
form
disciplinary
action
expose
constitutional
statutory
claims
remains
seen
whether
petitioner
show
board
response
reports
misconduct
clearly
unreasonable
light
known
circumstances
petitioner
may
able
show
board
subject
ed
lashonda
discrimination
failing
respond
way
period
five
months
complaints
misconduct
lashonda
female
students
requirement
recipients
receive
adequate
notice
title
ix
proscriptions
also
bears
proper
definition
discrimination
context
private
damages
action
elsewhere
concluded
sexual
harassment
form
discrimination
title
ix
purposes
title
ix
proscribes
harassment
sufficient
clarity
satisfy
pennhurst
notice
requirement
serve
basis
damages
action
see
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
dist
franklin
gwinnett
county
public
schools
supra
previously
determined
sexual
harassment
discrimination
school
context
title
ix
constrained
conclude
sexual
harassment
sufficiently
severe
likewise
rise
level
discrimination
actionable
statute
see
bennett
kentucky
dept
ed
rejecting
claim
insufficient
notice
pennhurst
statute
made
clear
conditions
placed
receipt
federal
funds
noting
congress
need
specifically
identif
proscrib
condition
legislation
statute
prohibitions
moreover
help
give
content
term
discrimination
context
students
protected
discrimination
also
specifically
shielded
excluded
participation
denied
benefits
education
program
activity
receiving
federal
financial
assistance
statute
makes
clear
whatever
else
prohibits
students
must
denied
access
educational
benefits
opportunities
basis
gender
thus
conclude
funding
recipients
properly
held
liable
damages
deliberately
indifferent
sexual
harassment
actual
knowledge
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
said
deprive
victims
access
educational
opportunities
benefits
provided
school
obvious
example
sexual
harassment
capable
triggering
damages
claim
thus
involve
overt
physical
deprivation
access
school
resources
consider
example
case
male
students
physically
threaten
female
peers
every
day
successfully
preventing
female
students
using
particular
school
resource
athletic
field
computer
lab
instance
district
administrators
well
aware
daily
ritual
yet
deliberately
ignore
requests
aid
female
students
wishing
use
resource
district
knowing
refusal
take
action
response
behavior
fly
face
title
ix
core
principles
deliberate
indifference
may
appropriately
subject
claims
monetary
damages
necessary
however
show
physical
exclusion
demonstrate
students
deprived
actions
another
student
students
educational
opportunity
basis
sex
rather
plaintiff
must
establish
sexual
harassment
students
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
undermines
detracts
victims
educational
experience
effectively
denied
equal
access
institution
resources
opportunities
cf
meritor
savings
bank
fsb
vinson
whether
conduct
rises
level
actionable
harassment
thus
depends
constellation
surrounding
circumstances
expectations
relationships
oncale
sundowner
offshore
services
including
limited
ages
harasser
victim
number
individuals
involved
see
ocr
title
ix
guidelines
courts
moreover
must
bear
mind
schools
unlike
adult
workplace
children
may
regularly
interact
manner
unacceptable
among
adults
see
brief
national
school
boards
association
et
al
amici
curiae
describing
dizzying
array
immature
behaviors
students
indeed
least
early
students
still
learning
interact
appropriately
peers
thus
understandable
school
setting
students
often
engage
insults
banter
teasing
shoving
pushing
conduct
upsetting
students
subjected
damages
available
simple
acts
teasing
among
school
children
however
even
comments
target
differences
gender
rather
context
harassment
damages
available
behavior
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
denies
victims
equal
access
education
title
ix
designed
protect
dissent
fails
appreciate
real
limitations
funding
recipient
liability
title
ix
enough
show
dissent
read
opinion
provide
student
teased
post
called
offensive
names
post
comparisons
overweight
child
skips
gym
class
children
tease
size
student
refuses
wear
glasses
avoid
taunts
child
refuses
go
school
school
bully
calls
recess
post
inapposite
misleading
contemplate
much
less
hold
mere
decline
grades
enough
survive
motion
dismiss
ibid
lashonda
grades
provides
necessary
evidence
potential
link
education
misconduct
petitioner
ability
state
cognizable
claim
depends
equally
alleged
persistence
severity
actions
mention
board
alleged
knowledge
deliberate
indifference
trust
dissent
characterization
opinion
mislead
courts
impose
sweeping
liability
read
title
ix
require
moreover
provision
discrimination
occur
education
program
activity
suggests
behavior
serious
enough
systemic
effect
denying
victim
equal
access
educational
program
activity
although
theory
single
instance
sufficiently
severe
peer
harassment
said
effect
think
unlikely
congress
thought
behavior
sufficient
rise
level
light
inevitability
student
misconduct
amount
litigation
invited
entertaining
claims
official
indifference
single
instance
peer
harassment
limiting
private
damages
actions
cases
systemic
effect
educational
programs
activities
reconcile
general
principle
title
ix
prohibits
official
indifference
known
peer
sexual
harassment
practical
realities
responding
student
behavior
realities
congress
meant
ignored
even
dissent
suggests
title
ix
liability
may
arise
funding
recipient
remains
indifferent
severe
mistreatment
played
widespread
level
among
students
post
fact
teacher
engaged
harassment
franklin
gebser
relevant
relationship
harasser
victim
necessarily
affects
extent
misconduct
said
breach
title
ix
guarantee
equal
access
educational
benefits
systemic
effect
program
activity
peer
harassment
particular
less
likely
satisfy
requirements
harassment
applying
standard
facts
issue
conclude
eleventh
circuit
erred
dismissing
petitioner
complaint
petitioner
alleges
daughter
victim
repeated
acts
sexual
harassment
period
allegations
support
conclusion
misconduct
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
harassment
verbal
included
numerous
acts
objectively
offensive
touching
indeed
ultimately
pleaded
guilty
criminal
sexual
misconduct
moreover
complaint
alleges
multiple
victims
sufficiently
disturbed
misconduct
seek
audience
school
principal
petitioner
contends
harassment
concrete
negative
effect
daughter
ability
receive
education
complaint
also
suggests
petitioner
may
able
show
actual
knowledge
deliberate
indifference
part
board
made
effort
whatsoever
either
investigate
put
end
harassment
complaint
say
beyond
doubt
petitioner
prove
set
facts
support
claim
entitle
relief
conley
gibson
see
also
scheuer
rhodes
issue
whether
plaintiff
ultimately
prevail
whether
claimant
entitled
offer
evidence
support
claims
accordingly
judgment
appeals
eleventh
circuit
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
aurelia
davis
next
friend
shonda
petitioner
monroe
county
board
education
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
may
justice
kennedy
chief
justice
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
join
dissenting
held
congress
power
authorize
expenditure
public
moneys
public
purposes
limited
direct
grants
legislative
power
found
constitution
south
dakota
dole
quoting
butler
consequence
congress
use
spending
clause
power
pursue
objectives
outside
article
enumerated
legislative
attaching
conditions
grant
federal
funds
understood
spending
clause
power
wielded
without
concern
federal
balance
potential
obliterate
distinctions
national
local
spheres
interest
power
permitting
federal
government
set
policy
sensitive
areas
traditional
state
concern
areas
otherwise
lie
outside
reach
vital
safeguard
federal
balance
requirement
congress
imposes
condition
receipt
federal
funds
must
unambiguously
pennhurst
state
school
hospital
halderman
majority
acknowledges
legislation
enacted
pursuant
spending
power
much
nature
contract
legitimacy
congress
exercise
power
condition
funding
state
compliance
congressional
conditions
rests
whether
state
voluntarily
knowingly
accepts
terms
contract
ibid
see
ante
course
knowing
acceptance
terms
putative
contract
state
unaware
conditions
imposed
legislation
unable
ascertain
expected
ibid
quoting
pennhurst
insistence
congress
speak
clear
voice
enable
exercise
choice
knowingly
cognizant
consequences
participation
pennhurst
supra
based
upon
abstract
notion
contractual
fairness
rather
concrete
safeguard
federal
system
receive
clear
notice
conditions
attached
federal
funds
guard
excessive
federal
intrusion
state
affairs
vigilant
policing
boundaries
federal
power
cf
dole
supra
dissenting
spending
power
limited
congress
notion
general
welfare
reality
given
vast
financial
resources
federal
government
spending
clause
gives
power
congress
tear
barriers
invade
jurisdiction
become
parliament
whole
people
subject
restrictions
save
quoting
butler
supra
majority
purports
give
effect
principles
eviscerates
safeguard
spending
clause
jurisprudence
title
ix
provides
person
shall
basis
sex
excluded
participation
denied
benefits
subjected
discrimination
education
program
activity
receiving
federal
financial
assistance
read
provision
full
understand
striking
application
case
title
ix
terms
create
private
cause
action
whatsoever
much
less
define
circumstances
money
damages
available
private
cause
action
title
ix
judicially
implied
see
cannon
university
chicago
encountered
great
difficulty
establishing
standards
deciding
imply
private
cause
action
federal
statute
silent
subject
try
conform
judicial
judgment
bounds
likely
congressional
purpose
observed
gebser
lago
vista
independent
school
district
defining
scope
private
cause
action
general
damages
remedy
particular
inherently
entails
degree
speculation
since
addresses
issue
congress
specifically
spoken
statute
issue
spending
clause
statute
element
speculation
particularly
troubling
significant
tension
requirement
spending
clause
legislation
give
clear
notice
consequences
acceptance
federal
funds
without
doubt
scope
potential
damages
liability
one
significant
factors
school
consider
deciding
whether
receive
federal
funds
accordingly
must
imply
private
cause
action
damages
unless
demonstrate
congressional
purpose
create
implied
cause
action
manifest
state
accepting
federal
funds
clear
notice
terms
conditions
monetary
liability
today
fails
heed
even
acknowledge
limitations
authority
remedial
scheme
majority
creates
today
neither
sensible
faithful
spending
clause
principles
order
make
case
school
liability
peer
sexual
harassment
majority
must
establish
congress
gave
grant
recipients
clear
unambiguous
notice
liable
money
damages
failure
remedy
discriminatory
acts
students
majority
must
also
demonstrate
statute
gives
schools
clear
notice
one
child
harassment
another
constitutes
discrimination
basis
sex
within
meaning
title
ix
applied
individual
cases
standard
liability
enable
grant
recipient
distinguish
inappropriate
childish
behavior
actionable
gender
discrimination
majority
carry
burdens
instead
majority
finds
statutory
clarity
none
discovers
indicia
congressional
notice
unusual
places
treats
issue
one
routine
statutory
construction
alone
errs
even
regard
end
majority
imposes
liability
unexpected
unknown
contours
yet
unknowable
majority
opinion
purports
narrow
limiting
principles
proposes
illusory
fence
built
made
little
sticks
contain
avalanche
liability
set
motion
potential
costs
schools
today
decision
difficult
estimate
great
unlikely
congress
intended
inflict
certainty
flowing
majority
decision
scarce
resources
diverted
educating
children
many
school
districts
desperate
avoid
title
ix
peer
harassment
suits
adopt
whatever
federal
code
student
conduct
discipline
department
education
sees
fit
impose
upon
nation
schoolchildren
learn
first
lessons
federalism
classrooms
federal
government
regulator
federal
government
insinuated
one
traditional
areas
state
concern
also
one
sensitive
areas
human
affairs
federal
control
discipline
nation
schoolchildren
contrary
traditions
inconsistent
sensible
administration
schools
title
ix
give
unambiguous
notice
accepting
federal
funds
meant
ceding
federal
government
power
disciplinary
decisions
schools
dissent
turn
first
difficulty
majority
decision
schools
held
liable
peer
sexual
harassment
title
ix
give
clear
unambiguous
notice
liable
damages
failure
remedy
discrimination
students
majority
acknowledges
title
ix
prohibits
misconduct
grant
recipients
misconduct
third
parties
ante
recipient
must
exclud
persons
participation
den
persons
benefits
subjec
persons
discrimination
program
activit
ies
order
liable
title
ix
majority
argues
nevertheless
school
subjects
students
discrimination
knows
peer
harassment
fails
respond
appropriately
mere
word
subjected
bear
weight
majority
argument
recognized
gebser
primary
purpose
title
ix
prevent
recipients
federal
financial
assistance
using
funds
discriminatory
manner
gebser
stressed
gebser
title
ix
prevents
discrimination
grant
recipient
whether
acts
principals
acts
agents
see
id
explaining
title
ix
title
vi
operate
manner
conditioning
offer
federal
funding
promise
recipient
discriminate
amounts
essentially
contract
government
recipient
funds
hereas
title
vii
aims
centrally
compensate
victims
discrimination
title
ix
focuses
protecting
individuals
discriminatory
practices
carried
recipients
federal
funds
id
majority
even
attempt
argue
school
failure
respond
discriminatory
acts
students
discrimination
school
event
plaintiff
establish
title
ix
violation
merely
showing
subjected
discrimination
rather
violation
title
ix
occurs
subjected
discrimination
education
program
activity
program
activity
defined
operations
grant
recipient
natural
reading
provision
discrimination
violates
title
ix
authorized
accordance
actions
activities
policies
grant
recipient
see
webster
third
new
international
dictionary
defining
required
accordance
bound
american
heritage
dictionary
english
language
defining
ith
authorization
attested
virtue
random
house
dictionary
english
language
ed
defining
authorized
warranted
attested
accordance
see
also
words
phrases
citing
cases
defining
inter
alia
accordance
conformity
indicating
subjection
guidance
control
meaning
authority
reason
means
virtue
defined
meaning
authority
reading
reflects
common
legal
usage
term
mean
pursuant
accordance
authorized
provided
see
gregory
ashcroft
congress
nowhere
stated
intent
impose
mandatory
obligations
powers
concluded
congress
ante
among
petitioner
claims
claim
monetary
injunctive
relief
title
ix
enough
alleged
discrimination
occur
context
subject
school
district
control
ante
discrimination
must
actually
controlled
authorized
pursuant
accordance
school
policy
actions
compare
ante
defining
condition
subjection
regulation
subordination
emphasis
added
ibid
defining
subject
guidance
instruction
emphasis
added
reading
also
consistent
fact
discrimination
must
operations
grant
recipient
term
operations
connotes
active
affirmative
participation
grant
recipient
merely
inaction
failure
respond
see
black
law
dictionary
ed
defining
operation
xertion
power
process
operating
mode
action
effect
brought
accordance
definite
plan
action
activity
teacher
sexual
harassment
students
school
program
activity
certain
circumstances
student
harassment
decision
gebser
recognizes
grant
recipient
acts
agents
thus
certain
limited
circumstances
even
tortious
acts
teachers
may
attributable
school
noted
gebser
contrast
title
vii
defines
employer
include
agent
title
ix
contains
comparable
reference
educational
institution
agents
expressly
call
application
agency
principles
gebser
supra
result
declined
incorporate
principles
agency
liability
strict
application
vicarious
liability
conflict
spending
clause
notice
requirement
title
ix
express
administrative
enforcement
scheme
contrary
majority
assertion
ante
however
abandon
agency
principles
altogether
rather
sought
gebser
identify
employee
actions
fairly
attributed
grant
recipient
superimposing
additional
spending
clause
notice
requirements
traditional
agency
principles
gebser
title
ix
contains
important
clues
congress
intend
allow
recovery
damages
liability
rests
solely
principles
vicarious
liability
constructive
notice
concluded
spending
clause
overlay
teacher
discrimination
attributable
school
school
actual
notice
harassment
deliberately
indifferent
agency
relation
school
teacher
thus
necessary
sufficient
condition
school
liability
heightened
requirements
attribution
met
teacher
actions
treated
grant
recipient
actions
circumstances
teacher
sexual
harassment
operations
school
aware
basis
law
fact
however
attributing
acts
student
school
indeed
majority
argue
school
acts
students
see
ante
disagree
respondents
assertion
petitioner
seeks
hold
board
liable
actions
instead
petitioner
attempts
hold
board
liable
decision
remain
idle
face
known
harassment
schools
discrimination
one
student
another
therefore
school
program
activity
required
title
ix
majority
imposition
liability
peer
sexual
harassment
thus
conflicts
natural
interpretation
title
ix
program
activity
limitation
school
liability
least
reading
undermines
majority
implicit
claim
title
ix
imposes
unambiguous
duty
schools
remedy
peer
sexual
harassment
quite
aside
disregard
program
limitation
title
ix
majority
reading
flawed
respects
majority
contends
school
deliberate
indifference
known
student
harassment
subjects
students
harassment
cause
students
undergo
harassment
ante
majority
recognizes
however
must
limitation
conduct
school
fairly
said
cause
search
principle
majority
asserts
without
much
elaboration
one
causes
discrimination
one
degree
control
discrimination
fails
remedy
ante
state
majority
test
understand
little
exercise
arbitrary
majority
explain
determine
degree
control
sufficient
point
clear
notice
draw
line
encompass
students
agency
principles
usually
mark
outer
limits
entity
liability
actions
individual
exercises
control
cf
faragher
boca
raton
applying
agency
principles
delimit
title
vii
employer
liability
burlington
industries
ellerth
example
recognized
liability
actions
nonagents
title
vii
contains
express
private
right
action
spending
clause
legislation
majority
nonetheless
rejects
agency
limitation
title
ix
liability
based
cramped
reading
gebser
noted
gebser
rejected
wholesale
importation
federal
agency
principles
title
ix
expand
liability
beyond
statute
clearly
prohibited
majority
reject
proposition
school
liability
limited
agency
principles
indeed
suppose
congress
rejected
principles
agency
law
favor
majority
vague
control
principle
turns
gebser
head
gebser
contemplated
title
ix
liability
less
expansive
title
vii
liability
see
gebser
supra
one
think
majority
least
limit
control
principle
reference
practice
department
education
doe
first
years
passage
title
ix
doe
regulations
drew
liability
line
expansive
encompass
school
delegated
official
functions
see
cfr
grant
recipient
shall
enter
contractual
relationship
directly
indirectly
effect
subjecting
employees
students
discrimination
prohibited
subpart
including
relationships
employment
referral
agencies
labor
unions
organizations
providing
administering
fringe
benefits
employees
recipient
perhaps
reasonable
suppose
grant
recipients
notice
hire
third
parties
example
might
reasonable
find
school
notice
circumvent
title
ix
core
prohibitions
example
delegating
admissions
decisions
outside
screening
committee
knew
discriminate
basis
gender
given
state
gender
discrimination
law
time
title
ix
passed
however
basis
think
congress
contemplated
liability
school
failure
remedy
discriminatory
acts
students
believe
statute
imposed
clear
obligation
title
ix
enacted
concept
sexual
harassment
gender
discrimination
recognized
considered
courts
see
generally
mackinnon
sexual
harassment
working
women
case
sex
discrimination
types
discrimination
recognized
discriminatory
admissions
standards
denial
access
programs
resources
hiring
engaged
students
see
referencing
application
title
ix
prohibitions
school
admissions
majority
nonetheless
appears
see
need
justify
drawing
enough
control
line
encompass
students
truth
however
school
control
students
much
complicated
limited
majority
acknowledges
public
school
control
students
way
controls
teachers
contracts
public
schools
screen
select
students
power
discipline
students
far
unfettered
public
schools
generally
obligated
law
educate
students
live
within
defined
geographic
boundaries
indeed
constitution
almost
every
state
country
guarantees
state
students
free
primary
secondary
public
education
see
cal
art
ix
colo
art
ix
ga
art
viii
ind
art
viii
md
art
viii
mo
art
ix
neb
art
vii
art
viii
art
xii
art
xi
const
art
viii
okla
art
xiii
art
xi
tex
art
vii
va
art
viii
wash
art
ix
wyo
art
vii
least
moreover
continuing
duty
schools
educate
even
students
suspended
expelled
see
phillip
leon
board
education
holding
education
clause
west
virginia
constitution
confers
students
fundamental
right
education
requires
county
school
board
provide
alternative
educational
programs
alternative
school
students
expelled
suspended
extended
period
bringing
guns
school
schools
remove
harasser
classroom
attempt
fulfill
obligation
placing
harasser
kind
group
setting
rather
hiring
expensive
tutors
student
find
continuing
risk
title
ix
suits
brought
students
alternative
education
program
addition
federal
law
imposes
constraints
school
disciplinary
actions
held
example
due
process
requires
minimum
student
facing
suspension
given
kind
notice
afforded
kind
hearing
goss
lopez
emphasis
added
individuals
disabilities
education
act
idea
et
seq
supp
iii
moreover
places
strict
limits
ability
schools
take
disciplinary
actions
students
behavior
disorder
disabilities
even
disability
diagnosed
prior
incident
triggering
discipline
see
parents
entitled
hearing
school
proposes
change
disabled
student
educational
placement
school
authorities
order
change
placement
child
disability
appropriate
interim
alternative
educational
setting
another
setting
suspension
school
days
unless
student
offense
involved
weapon
illegal
drugs
child
determined
eligible
special
education
engaged
behavior
violated
school
rule
may
assert
protections
subchapter
school
knowledge
child
child
disability
behavior
precipitated
disciplinary
action
occurred
ii
school
deemed
knowledge
child
child
disability
behavior
performance
child
demonstrates
need
special
education
related
services
disability
defined
act
includes
serious
emotional
disturbance
doe
turn
defined
condition
exhibiting
long
period
time
marked
degree
adversely
affects
child
educational
performance
inability
build
maintain
satisfactory
interpersonal
relationships
peers
teachers
nappropriate
types
behavior
feelings
normal
circumstances
cfr
majority
us
believe
behavior
constitutes
actionable
peer
sexual
harassment
deviates
normal
teasing
jostling
adolescence
puts
schools
clear
notice
potential
liability
student
engages
harassment
may
least
colorable
claim
severe
emotional
disturbance
within
meaning
idea
imposing
disciplinary
sanction
student
harasser
might
assert
colorable
idea
claim
school
must
navigate
complex
web
statutory
provisions
doe
regulations
significantly
limit
discretion
practical
obstacles
schools
encounter
ensuring
thousands
immature
students
conform
conduct
acceptable
norms
may
even
significant
legal
obstacles
school
districts
exercise
measure
control
thousands
students
hundred
adult
employees
limited
resources
schools
must
conserved
basic
educational
services
schools
lack
resources
even
deal
serious
problems
violence
already
overwhelmed
disciplinary
problems
kinds
perhaps
even
startling
broad
assumptions
school
control
primary
secondary
school
students
majority
failure
grapple
meaningful
way
distinction
elementary
secondary
schools
one
hand
universities
majority
bolsters
argument
schools
control
students
actions
quoting
decision
vernonia
school
dist
acton
proposition
nature
state
power
public
school
children
custodial
tutelary
permitting
degree
supervision
control
exercised
free
adults
ante
yet
majority
holding
appear
apply
equal
force
universities
exercise
custodial
tutelary
power
adult
students
university
power
discipline
students
speech
may
constitute
sexual
harassment
also
circumscribed
first
amendment
number
federal
courts
already
confronted
difficult
problems
raised
university
speech
codes
designed
deal
peer
sexual
racial
harassment
see
dambrot
central
michigan
university
striking
university
discriminatory
harassment
policy
overbroad
vague
valid
prohibition
fighting
words
uwm
post
board
regents
university
wisconsin
system
supp
ed
striking
university
speech
code
prohibited
inter
alia
discriminatory
directed
individual
intentionally
sex
reate
intimidating
hostile
demeaning
environment
education
university
related
work
doe
university
michigan
supp
ed
similar
iota
xi
chapter
sigma
chi
fraternity
george
mason
university
overturning
first
amendment
grounds
university
sanctions
fraternity
conducting
ugly
woman
contest
racist
sexist
overtones
difficulties
associated
speech
codes
simply
underscore
limited
nature
university
control
student
behavior
may
viewed
sexual
harassment
despite
fact
majority
relies
assumption
schools
exercise
great
deal
control
students
justify
creating
private
cause
action
first
instance
recognize
obvious
limits
university
ability
control
students
reason
doubt
propriety
private
cause
action
peer
harassment
simply
uses
factor
determining
whether
university
response
reasonable
see
ante
majority
presentation
control
test
illustrates
discomfort
rule
devised
rather
beginning
language
title
ix
majority
begins
decision
gebser
appears
discover
sweeping
legal
duty
divorced
agency
principles
schools
remedy
discrimination
students
majority
finds
doe
title
ix
regulations
state
common
law
gave
requisite
notice
liable
damages
failure
fulfill
duty
majority
turn
language
title
ix
appears
find
duty
clear
notice
majority
assumes
already
established
rather
suggest
limit
breathtaking
scope
liability
majority
thinks
clear
statute
see
ante
factors
subjects
combine
limit
recipient
damages
liability
circumstances
wherein
recipient
exercises
substantial
control
harasser
context
known
harassment
occurs
decision
gebser
course
recognize
legal
duty
schools
remedy
discrimination
third
parties
particular
gebser
gave
schools
notice
whatsoever
might
liable
majority
novel
theory
school
subjects
student
discrimination
exercises
measure
control
third
party
quoted
subjected
discrimination
language
gebser
quoted
text
title
ix
full
use
word
control
instead
affirmed
title
ix
prohibits
discrimination
grant
recipient
see
gebser
supra
neither
doe
title
ix
regulations
state
tort
law
moreover
provide
notice
required
spending
clause
principles
majority
contends
doe
title
ix
regulations
long
provided
funding
recipients
notice
may
liable
failure
respond
discriminatory
acts
certain
ante
even
assuming
doe
regulations
give
schools
requisite
notice
one
regulations
majority
cites
suggests
schools
may
held
liable
money
damages
failure
respond
discrimination
addition
discussed
doe
regulations
provide
support
proposition
schools
notice
students
among
whose
actions
schools
bound
remedy
regulations
cited
majority
merely
forbid
grant
recipients
give
affirmative
aid
third
parties
discriminate
see
cfr
grant
recipient
shall
basis
sex
id
perpetuate
discrimination
person
providing
significant
assistance
agency
organization
person
discriminates
basis
sex
providing
aid
benefit
service
students
employees
see
also
grant
recipient
shall
hrough
solicitation
listing
approval
provision
facilities
services
assist
foundation
trust
agency
organization
person
provides
assistance
recipient
students
manner
discriminates
basis
sex
grant
recipient
assists
agency
organization
person
making
employment
available
students
hall
assure
employment
made
available
without
discrimination
basis
sex
hall
render
services
agency
organization
person
discriminates
basis
sex
employment
practices
others
forbid
grant
recipients
delegate
provision
student
employee
benefits
services
third
parties
engage
gender
discrimination
administering
effect
school
program
see
grant
recipient
shall
enter
contractual
relationship
directly
indirectly
effect
subjecting
employees
students
discrimination
prohibited
subpart
including
relationships
employment
referral
agencies
labor
unions
organizations
providing
administering
fringe
benefits
employees
recipient
see
also
grant
recipient
requires
participation
applicant
student
employee
education
program
activity
operated
wholly
recipient
facilitates
permits
considers
participation
part
equivalent
education
program
activity
operated
recipient
including
participation
educational
consortia
cooperative
employment
assignments
must
take
steps
assure
education
program
activity
discriminating
basis
gender
shall
facilitate
require
permit
consider
participation
program
discriminating
none
regulations
suggests
generalized
duty
remedy
discrimination
third
parties
school
may
arguably
exercise
control
requiring
school
take
affirmative
steps
remedy
harassment
students
imposes
much
heavier
burden
schools
prohibiting
affirmative
aid
effective
delegation
school
functions
entity
discriminates
notice
latter
responsibilities
hardly
said
encompass
clear
notice
former
addition
doe
regulations
predicated
grant
recipient
choice
give
affirmative
aid
enter
voluntary
association
discriminating
entity
recipient
moreover
regulations
envision
free
terminate
aid
association
provided
contract
relationships
regulated
doe
thus
quite
different
relationships
differences
confirm
regulations
provide
adequate
notice
duty
remedy
student
discrimination
majority
also
concludes
state
tort
law
provided
requisite
notice
non
sequitur
suppose
however
state
knows
liable
federal
statute
simply
underlying
conduct
might
form
basis
state
tort
action
event
far
clear
georgia
law
gave
monroe
county
board
education
notice
liable
even
state
law
failure
respond
reasonably
known
student
harassment
see
holbrook
executive
conference
center
app
holding
school
districts
entitled
sovereign
immunity
claims
based
supervision
students
unless
school
displayed
wilfulness
malice
corruption
majority
final
observation
notice
confirms
far
strayed
basic
spending
clause
principle
congress
must
clear
terms
statute
give
notice
statute
requires
majority
contends
schools
notice
told
national
school
boards
association
publication
peer
sexual
harassment
might
trigger
title
ix
liability
ante
treating
publication
designed
help
school
lawyers
prevent
guard
school
liability
reliable
indicium
congressional
notice
majority
transformed
litigation
manual
like
manuals
errs
side
caution
describing
potential
liability
prophecy
seems
schools
even
discuss
potential
liabilities
amongst
without
somehow
stipulating
congress
specified
intent
ii
decision
gebser
makes
clear
spending
clause
rule
requires
recipients
general
notice
kind
conduct
statute
prohibits
least
money
damages
sought
notice
illegal
conduct
occurring
given
situation
see
gebser
rejecting
vicarious
liability
hold
schools
liable
even
know
prohibited
discrimination
occurring
title
ix
however
gives
schools
neither
notice
conduct
majority
labels
peer
sexual
harassment
gender
discrimination
within
meaning
act
guidance
distinguishing
individual
cases
actionable
discrimination
immature
behavior
children
adolescents
majority
thus
imposes
schools
potentially
crushing
financial
liability
student
conduct
prohibited
clear
terms
title
ix
even
today
opinion
identified
either
schools
courts
precision
law
recognizes
children
particularly
young
children
fully
accountable
actions
lack
capacity
exercise
mature
judgment
see
farnsworth
farnsworth
contracts
ed
discussing
minor
ability
disaffirm
contract
entered
surprise
one
schools
primary
locus
children
social
development
rife
inappropriate
behavior
children
learning
interact
peers
amici
front
lines
schools
describe
situation
best
unlike
adults
workplace
juveniles
limited
life
experiences
familial
influences
upon
establish
understanding
appropriate
behavior
real
world
school
discipline
place
students
practice
newly
learned
vulgarities
erupt
anger
tease
embarrass
share
offensive
notes
flirt
push
shove
halls
grab
offend
brief
national
school
boards
association
et
al
amici
curiae
hereinafter
school
amici
one
contests
much
dizzying
array
immature
uncontrollable
behaviors
students
ibid
inappropriate
even
objectively
offensive
times
ante
parents
schools
moral
ethical
responsibility
help
students
learn
interact
peers
appropriate
manner
doubtless
case
moreover
much
inappropriate
behavior
directed
toward
members
opposite
sex
children
throes
adolescence
struggle
express
emerging
sexual
identities
far
different
question
however
whether
either
proper
useful
label
immature
childish
behavior
gender
discrimination
nothing
title
ix
suggests
congress
even
contemplated
question
much
less
answered
affirmative
unambiguous
terms
majority
nevertheless
problem
labeling
conduct
fifth
graders
sexual
harassment
gender
discrimination
indeed
majority
sidesteps
difficult
issue
entirely
first
asserting
without
analysis
respondents
support
argument
harassment
rise
level
discrimination
purposes
title
ix
ante
citing
gebser
franklin
gwinnett
county
public
schools
proposition
elsewhere
concluded
sexual
harassment
form
discrimination
title
ix
purposes
title
ix
proscribes
harassment
sufficient
clarity
satisfy
pennhurst
notice
requirement
serve
basis
damages
action
ante
contrary
majority
assertion
however
respondents
made
cogent
persuasive
argument
type
student
conduct
alleged
petitioner
considered
sexual
harassment
much
less
gender
discrimination
actionable
title
ix
time
petitioner
filed
complaint
including
recognized
concept
sexual
harassment
context
employment
context
extended
concept
sexual
harassment
misconduct
emotionally
socially
immature
children
type
conduct
alleged
petitioner
complaint
new
however
past
years
properly
identified
misconduct
addressed
within
context
student
discipline
petitioner
asks
create
whole
cloth
cause
action
labeling
childish
misconduct
sexual
harassment
stigmatize
children
sexual
harassers
federal
system
take
additional
burden
second
guessing
disciplinary
actions
taken
school
administrators
addressing
misconduct
something
consistently
refused
brief
respondents
citation
omitted
see
also
brief
independent
women
forum
amicus
curiae
questioning
whether
primary
secondary
school
level
proper
label
sexual
misconduct
students
sexual
harassment
power
relationship
harasser
victim
likewise
majority
assertion
gebser
franklin
settled
question
little
ipse
dixit
gebser
franklin
nothing
cite
meritor
savings
bank
fsb
vinson
title
vii
case
proposition
supervisor
sexually
harasses
subordinate
subordinate
sex
supervisor
discriminate
basis
sex
see
franklin
supra
gebser
treat
proposition
establishing
student
conduct
issue
gender
discrimination
erase
one
stroke
differences
children
adults
peers
teachers
schools
workplaces
reality
established
body
federal
state
law
courts
may
draw
defining
student
conduct
qualifies
title
ix
gender
discrimination
analogies
title
vii
hostile
environment
harassment
inapposite
schools
workplaces
children
adults
norms
adult
workplace
defined
hostile
environment
sexual
harassment
see
oncale
sundowner
offshore
services
easily
translated
peer
relationships
schools
teenage
romantic
relationships
dating
part
everyday
life
analogies
title
ix
teacher
sexual
harassment
students
similarly
flawed
teacher
sexual
overtures
toward
student
always
inappropriate
teenager
romantic
overtures
classmate
even
persistent
unwelcome
inescapable
part
adolescence
majority
admits
approach
hether
conduct
rises
level
actionable
harassment
depends
constellation
surrounding
circumstances
expectations
relationships
including
limited
ages
harasser
victim
number
individuals
involved
ante
citations
omitted
majority
explain
school
supposed
discern
mishmash
factors
actionable
discrimination
multifactored
balancing
test
far
cry
clarity
demand
spending
clause
legislation
difficulties
schools
encounter
identifying
peer
sexual
harassment
already
evident
teachers
manuals
designed
give
guidance
subject
example
one
teachers
manual
peer
sexual
harassment
suggests
sexual
harassment
kindergarten
third
grade
includes
boy
put
playground
wants
play
house
girls
girl
put
shoots
baskets
better
boys
minnesota
dept
education
girls
boys
getting
along
teaching
sexual
harassment
prevention
elementary
classroom
yet
another
manual
suggests
one
student
saying
another
look
nice
sexual
harassment
depending
tone
voice
student
looks
else
around
stein
sjostrom
flirting
hurting
teacher
guide
sexual
harassment
schools
grades
blowing
kiss
also
suspect
ibid
confusion
likely
compounded
label
invested
force
federal
law
backed
private
damages
suits
guidance
majority
gives
schools
distinguishing
simple
acts
teasing
among
school
children
said
basis
suit
even
target
differences
gender
ante
actionable
peer
sexual
harassment
reality
guidance
majority
proclaims
context
harassment
damages
available
situation
behavior
serious
pervasive
objectively
offensive
denies
victims
equal
access
education
title
ix
designed
protect
ante
majority
even
purport
explain
however
constitutes
actionable
denial
equal
access
education
equal
access
denied
girl
tires
chased
boys
recess
refuses
go
outside
concentrate
class
worried
recess
activities
pretends
sick
one
day
stay
home
school
appears
majority
content
let
juries
decide
majority
reference
systemic
effect
ante
nothing
clarify
content
standard
majority
appears
intend
requirement
exclude
possibility
single
act
harassment
perpetrated
one
student
one
student
form
basis
actionable
claim
small
concession
indeed
real
clue
majority
gives
schools
dividing
line
actionable
harassment
denies
victim
equal
access
education
mere
inappropriate
teasing
profoundly
unsettling
one
facts
case
petitioner
stated
claim
alleged
majority
words
harassment
concrete
negative
effect
daughter
ability
receive
education
ante
petitioner
words
effects
might
visible
school
daughter
grades
dropped
ability
concentrate
school
work
affected
app
pet
cert
almost
adolescents
experience
problems
one
time
another
mature
iii
majority
inability
provide
workable
definition
actionable
peer
harassment
simply
underscores
myriad
ways
opinion
purports
narrow
fact
broad
support
untold
numbers
lawyers
prove
adept
presenting
cases
withstand
defendant
school
districts
pretrial
motions
barriers
litigation
majority
offers
us
crumbles
weight
even
casual
scrutiny
example
majority
establishes
sounds
like
relatively
high
threshold
liability
denial
equal
access
education
almost
breath
makes
clear
alleging
decline
grades
enough
survive
follows
state
winning
claim
majority
seems
oblivious
fact
almost
every
child
point
trouble
school
teased
peers
girl
wants
skip
recess
teased
boys
different
overweight
child
skips
gym
class
children
tease
size
locker
room
child
risks
flunking
refuses
wear
glasses
avoid
taunts
child
refuses
go
school
school
bully
calls
recess
children
respond
teasing
ways
detract
ability
learn
majority
test
actionable
harassment
result
sweep
almost
innocuous
conduct
acknowledges
ubiquitous
part
school
life
string
adjectives
majority
attaches
word
harassment
severe
pervasive
objectively
offensive
likewise
fails
narrow
class
conduct
trigger
liability
since
touchstone
determining
whether
title
ix
liability
effect
child
ability
get
education
ante
indeed
reliance
impact
child
educational
experience
suggests
objective
offensiveness
comment
judged
reference
reasonable
child
comments
aimed
standard
likely
quite
expansive
also
gives
schools
juries
little
guidance
requiring
attempt
gauge
sensitivities
instance
average
seven
year
old
majority
assures
us
decision
interfere
school
discipline
instructs
previously
noted
courts
refrain
second
guessing
disciplinary
decisions
made
school
administrators
ante
obvious
reason
majority
expressed
reluctance
allow
courts
litigants
school
disciplinary
decisions
school
officials
usually
best
position
judge
seriousness
alleged
harassment
devise
appropriate
response
problem
majority
test
fact
invites
courts
juries
school
administrators
every
case
judge
instance
whether
school
response
clearly
unreasonable
reasonableness
standard
regardless
modifier
transforms
every
disciplinary
decision
jury
question
cf
doe
university
illinois
holding
college
student
stated
title
ix
claim
peer
sexual
harassment
even
though
school
officials
suspended
two
male
students
days
transferred
another
biology
class
another
professed
limitation
majority
relies
upon
recipient
liable
acts
student
harassment
known
see
ante
id
majority
enunciation
standard
begs
obvious
question
known
yet
majority
says
one
word
type
school
employee
must
know
harassment
actionable
majority
silence
telling
deliberate
indifference
liability
recognized
gebser
predicated
notice
official
recipient
entity
authority
take
corrective
action
end
discrimination
gebser
supra
majority
gives
indication
believes
standard
different
context
given
extensive
reliance
gebser
standard
throughout
opinion
appears
adopt
gebser
notice
standard
implication
least
courts
adjudicating
title
ix
peer
harassment
claims
likely
conclude
choosing
adopt
standard
explicit
terms
majority
avoids
confront
bizarre
implications
decision
context
teacher
harassment
gebser
notice
standard
imposes
limit
school
liability
peer
harassment
discrimination
however
imposes
limitation
cases
student
misbehavior
teacher
authority
least
first
instance
punish
student
take
measures
remedy
harassment
anomalous
result
school
district
held
liable
teacher
sexual
harassment
student
without
notice
school
board
least
principal
district
held
liable
teacher
failure
remedy
peer
harassment
threshold
school
liability
appears
lower
harasser
student
harasser
teacher
agent
school
absurdity
result
confirms
neither
contemplated
congress
anticipated
majority
limitations
peer
sexual
harassment
suits
hope
contain
flood
liability
today
begins
elements
title
ix
claim
created
majority
easy
allege
also
prove
female
plaintiff
pleads
boy
called
offensive
names
told
teacher
teacher
response
unreasonable
school
performance
suffered
result
appears
state
successful
claim
shortage
plaintiffs
bring
complaints
schools
charged
day
educating
millions
children
millions
students
large
percentage
point
school
careers
experience
something
consider
sexual
harassment
study
american
association
university
women
educational
foundation
instance
found
fully
students
report
target
form
sexual
harassment
school
lives
hostile
hallways
aauw
survey
sexual
harassment
america
schools
number
potential
lawsuits
schools
staggering
cost
defending
peer
sexual
harassment
suits
alone
overwhelm
many
school
districts
particularly
since
majority
liability
standards
allow
almost
plaintiff
get
summary
judgment
jury
addition
damages
caps
judicially
implied
private
cause
action
title
ix
result
school
liability
one
peer
sexual
harassment
suit
approach
even
exceed
total
federal
funding
many
school
districts
petitioner
example
seeks
damages
case
app
pet
cert
respondent
school
district
received
approximately
federal
aid
brief
school
amici
school
district
sued
gebser
received
federal
funds
year
indeed
entire
budget
district
million
see
tr
oral
arg
limitless
liability
confronting
schools
implied
title
ix
cause
action
puts
schools
far
worse
position
businesses
congress
established
express
cause
action
money
damages
title
vii
prescribed
damage
caps
see
gebser
supra
congress
made
damages
available
title
vii
even
congress
carefully
limited
amount
recoverable
individual
case
calibrating
maximum
recovery
size
employer
see
adopting
petitioners
position
amount
allowing
unlimited
recovery
damages
title
ix
congress
spoken
subject
either
right
remedy
face
evidence
congress
expressly
considered
title
vii
restricted
amount
damages
available
addition
contrast
title
vii
title
ix
makes
provision
agency
investigation
conciliation
complaints
prior
filing
case
federal
weed
frivolous
suits
settle
meritorious
ones
minimal
cost
prospect
unlimited
title
ix
liability
likelihood
breed
climate
fear
encourages
school
administrators
label
even
innocuous
childish
conduct
sexual
harassment
appear
coincidence
long
doe
issued
proposed
policy
guidance
warning
schools
liable
peer
sexual
harassment
fall
see
fed
reg
north
carolina
school
suspended
boy
kissed
female
classmate
cheek
sexual
harassment
theory
nwelcome
unwelcome
age
los
angeles
times
week
later
new
york
school
suspended
kissed
classmate
ripped
button
skirt
buffalo
news
second
grader
said
got
idea
favorite
book
corduroy
bear
missing
button
ibid
school
administrators
said
given
guidelines
suspend
children
follow
guidelines
ibid
college
level
majority
holding
sure
add
fuel
debate
campus
speech
codes
name
preventing
hostile
educational
environment
may
infringe
students
first
amendment
rights
see
supra
indeed
majority
control
principle
schools
presumably
responsible
remedying
conduct
occurs
even
student
dormitory
rooms
result
schools
may
well
forced
apply
workplace
norms
private
domains
even
schools
resist
overzealous
enforcement
may
find
careful
reasoned
response
sexual
harassment
complaint
nonetheless
provokes
litigation
speaking
voice
experience
school
amici
remind
us
istory
shows
matter
school
official
chooses
someone
unhappy
student
offenders
almost
always
view
punishment
strict
student
complainants
almost
always
view
offender
punishment
lax
brief
school
amici
school
faced
peer
sexual
harassment
complaint
wake
majority
decision
may
well
beset
litigation
every
side
one
student
demand
quick
response
harassment
complaint
conflict
alleged
harasser
demand
due
process
another
student
demand
classroom
conflict
alleged
harasser
claim
mainstream
placement
individuals
disabilities
education
act
state
constitutional
right
continuing
free
public
education
college
campuses
even
secondary
schools
student
claim
school
remedy
sexually
hostile
environment
conflict
alleged
harasser
claim
speech
even
offensive
protected
first
amendment
situations
school
faces
risk
suit
maybe
even
multiple
suits
regardless
response
see
doe
university
illinois
posner
dissenting
denial
rehearing
en
banc
liability
failing
prevent
rectify
sexual
harassment
one
student
another
places
school
razor
edge
since
remedial
measures
takes
alleged
harasser
likely
expose
school
suit
failure
take
measures
expose
school
suit
victim
alleged
harassment
majority
holding
case
appears
driven
image
school
administration
sitting
idle
every
day
male
students
commandeer
school
athletic
field
computer
lab
prevent
female
students
using
physical
threats
see
ante
title
ix
might
provide
remedy
situation
however
without
resort
majority
unprecedented
theory
school
liability
student
harassment
school
usually
disciplines
students
threatening
prevents
blocking
others
access
school
facilities
school
failure
enforce
rules
boys
target
girls
widespread
level
day
day
may
support
inference
school
decision
respond
based
gender
pattern
discriminatory
response
form
basis
title
ix
action
contrary
majority
assertion
see
ante
suggest
mere
indifference
mistreatment
even
widespread
enough
trigger
title
ix
liability
suggest
clear
pattern
discriminatory
enforcement
school
rules
raise
inference
school
discriminating
recognizing
school
might
discriminate
based
gender
enforcement
rules
far
cry
recognizing
title
ix
liability
based
majority
expansive
theory
school
subjects
students
discrimination
control
harasser
fails
take
corrective
action
even
important
egregious
cases
student
remedies
available
student
often
recourse
offending
student
parents
state
tort
law
cases
like
one
perpetrator
may
also
subject
criminal
sanctions
majority
notes
student
may
circumstances
recourse
school
state
law
ante
disregarding
remedies
student
misbehavior
incentives
schools
already
provide
best
possible
education
students
majority
seeks
effect
put
end
student
misbehavior
transforming
title
ix
federal
student
civility
code
see
brief
independent
women
forum
amicus
curiae
urging
avoid
result
fail
see
federal
courts
administer
school
discipline
better
principals
teachers
public
entrusted
task
majority
holding
help
vast
majority
students
whose
educational
opportunities
diminished
diversion
school
funds
litigation
private
cause
action
creates
justify
corps
federal
administrators
writing
regulations
student
harassment
also
embroil
schools
courts
endless
litigation
qualifies
peer
sexual
harassment
constitutes
reasonable
response
final
analysis
case
federalism
yet
majority
decision
today
says
one
word
federal
balance
preserving
federal
system
legitimate
end
means
ends
ensures
essential
choices
made
government
proximate
people
vast
apparatus
federal
power
defining
appropriate
role
schools
teaching
supervising
children
beginning
explore
sexuality
learning
express
others
one
complex
sensitive
issues
schools
face
decisions
best
made
parents
teachers
school
administrators
counsel
delicacy
immense
significance
teaching
children
sexuality
cause
act
great
restraint
displaces
state
local
governments
heedless
considerations
rushes
onward
finding
cause
action
creates
necessary
effect
congressional
design
nothing
title
ix
suggests
congress
intended
contemplated
result
reaches
today
much
less
dictated
unambiguous
terms
today
decision
laid
feet
congress
responsibility
must
always
use
great
care
shapes
private
causes
action
without
clear
guidance
congress
never
federal
balance
stake
recognized
gebser
definition
implied
cause
action
inevitably
implicates
measure
discretion
shape
sensible
remedial
scheme
gebser
whether
ever
embarked
endeavor
spending
clause
statute
open
question
clear
beyond
doubt
however
exercise
discretion
due
regard
federalism
unique
role
system
today
disregards
obligation
conceive
interventions
intrusive
upon
delicate
vital
relations
teacher
student
student
student
state
citizens
one
creates
today
hand
trusted
principles
federalism
superseded
contemporary
imperative
perhaps
grave
surely
lasting
disservice
today
decision
ensures
disregard
federal
balance
soon
imparted
youngest
citizens
clears
way
federal
government
claim
center
stage
america
classrooms
today
decision
mandates
teachers
instructing
supervising
students
dubious
assistance
federal
plaintiffs
lawyers
makes
federal
courts
final
arbiters
school
policy
almost
every
disagreement
students
enforcement
federal
right
recognized
majority
means
federal
influence
permeate
everything
curriculum
decisions
classroom
logistics
interactions
today
johnny
find
routine
problems
adolescence
resolved
invoking
federal
right
demand
assignment
desk
two
rows
away
holding
makes
painfully
clear
majority
version
spending
clause
rule
substitute
real
protections
state
local
autonomy
constitutional
system
requires
doubt
futility
attempt
hedge
holding
words
limitation
future
cases
result
case
provides
answer
complaint
fifth
grader
survives
school
compelled
answer
federal
assured
like
suits
follow
suits
cost
number
impose
serious
financial
burdens
local
school
districts
taxpayers
support
children
serve
federalism
struggling
school
systems
deserve
better
dissent