Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Sweeping Changes Proposed for Federal Title IX Legislation

Client Alert
June 24, 2022

June 23, 2022, marked the 50th anniversary of Title IX — the federal civil rights legislation enacted to protect students from sex-based discrimination in educational programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. The anniversary was further marked by an announcement from the Biden administration of its intent to overhaul the landmark law, in part, by reinstating certain provisions removed, or otherwise modified, by the former administration.

In conjunction with the Department of Education, President Biden announced the proposed amendments to Title IX would have the impact of advancing “educational equity and opportunity”[1] for students across the country including, without limitation, those in the LGBTQIA+ community.  Specifically, the revised regulations are anticipated to clarify Title IX’s text to extend protections to students on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics and, moreover, extend protection to both students and employees who are pregnant and/or have pregnancy-related condition(s).

The proposed amendments would also require schools to respond promptly to all complaints of sex discrimination with a fair and reliable process that includes trained, unbiased Title IX coordinators, investigators, and decisionmakers to evaluate the evidence. Notably, the proposals would effectively remove the requirement that schools wait for a formal complaint prior to acting — thereby allowing schools to investigate and sanction sexual misconduct complaints more promptly. The proposals also allow informal resolution of an incident without the submission of a formal complaint (a formal complaint is a prerequisite under the current regulations).

Moreover, following investigation, decisionmakers may soon be subject to a revised, heightened threshold for standard of proof based on the evidence — the clear and convincing evidence standard, meaning that the evidence presented must be “highly” and substantially more probable to be true rather than untrue — depending on what standard the school uses in other comparable proceedings.

In addition to the above, the proposed regulations are generally intended to strengthen protections from retaliation for those who exercise Title IX rights, require schools to engage in and/or offer supportive measures to parties involved in Title IX actions, and improve the adaptability of the Title IX framework to be applied fully and fairly in all educational environments.

The proposed regulations also revert the definition of sexual harassment back to “unwelcome sex-based conduct that creates a hostile environment by denying or limiting a person’s ability to participate in a school’s education program or activity. This would impose significant changes to the current rule, which only prohibits unwelcome sex-based misconduct if it is “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to the recipient’s education program or activity.”

Practically speaking, the proposed regulations no longer require live hearings for Title IX investigations. This is a significant change from the August 2020 regulations, which directed higher education institutions to conduct live hearings with cross-examination following the investigation. Under the August 2020 regulations, a decisionmaker was prohibited from considering any statements of parties or witnesses that were not subject to cross-examination, and therefore not tested for credibility. Ultimately, the proposed regulations, by way of eliminating the live hearing requirement, could allow decisionmakers to consider more comprehensive evidence.

To the extent a live hearing is held, the proposed regulations also require higher education institutions to allow students who participate in the live hearing to do so remotely, if they so choose.

The proposed amendments will undergo a period of public comment for the next 60 days. The Education Department will then address each point in writing before the regulations can be finalized.

[1] See U.S. Department of Justice Press Release, “The U.S. Department of Education Releases Proposed Changes to Title IX Regulations, Invites Public Comment,” published June 23, 2022.

For additional information about the revised regulations, or how they may impact your institution, please reach out to one of Brennan, Manna & Diamond’s trained Title IX investigators and advisors, Monica Andress at mbandress@bmdllc.com, Krista Warren at kdwarren@bmdllc.com, Bryan Meek at bmeek@bmdllc.com, or Matt Duncan at mrduncan@bmdllc.com.

Monica Andresskrista warrenCivil RightsTitle IXLegislationBrennan Manna Diamond
Client Alert

The NLRB Limits the Reach of Confidentiality and Non-Disparagement Provisions in Severance Agreements Overruling Trump-Era Policies

March 14, 2023Employers should exercise caution and closely examine the content of severance agreements to ensure compliance with a recent National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) decision.  On February 21, 2023, the NLRB restricted the breadth of permissible language of confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses when it issued its decision in McLaren Macomb and overruled its Trump-era decisions in Baylor University Medical Center and IGT d/b/a International Game Technology.Client Alert

Ohio Medical Board Releases New Telehealth Rules

February 23, 2023On Tuesday, February 21, 2023, the State Medical Board of Ohio released its final telehealth rules to implement Ohio’s telehealth statute (O.R.C. 4743.09) for physicians, physician assistants, dieticians, respiratory care professionals and genetic counselors. Ohio’s advanced practice registered nurses (“APRNs”) should also take note of these rules. While the Medical Board does not govern APRNs directly, those APRNs who are required to have a collaborating physician and standard care arrangement (namely nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, and clinical nurse specialists) are still affected by the rules. Generally, if an APRN’s collaborating physician is limited in their practice, then the APRN will also be limited.Client Alert

The End of the Public Health Emergency is (Finally) Here

February 23, 2023The COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (“PHE”) that has been in effect for over three years is finally slated to end on May 11, 2023.[1] With the end of the PHE will come many changes for healthcare providers to be aware of; however, some changes may not come until much later.Client Alert

Multi-340B Contract Pharmacy Locations on the Brink? The Third Circuit’s Ruling Gives a Hint.

February 17, 2023The 340B drug discount program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to offer to sell their products at significant discounts to safety net providers called “covered entities.” In 1996, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) issued guidance authorizing covered entities to enter into a contract pharmacy arrangement with a single third-party contract pharmacy, to which the manufacturer would ship 340B medications but bill the covered entity. In 2010, HRSA issued revised guidance permitting covered entities to enter into an unlimited number of contract pharmacy arrangements.Client Alert

Five Opportunities for Operations and Compliance Excellence in 2023

February 17, 2023With the holidays behind us and the rest of the year ahead, now is the perfect time to get your operational/compliance house in order! Though your list might be a mile (or an inch) long, here are five places to start.
Older posts