This story appears in Sportico’s Morning Lead newsletter. Click below to sign up and get it delivered right to your box. Title IX will undergo significant changes as a result of the Biden administration’s release of a new rule and accompanying regulations that will affect college athletes, including some who see schools making clear NIL payments and others who work as unionized employees. A 1,577-page report issued by the U. S. Department of Education describes several modifications and justifications. On August 1st, the rule may become effective. 1 and does apply to all reported behavior that occurs after or on the same day. Title IX forbids gender bias at educational facilities that receive federal funding. In college athletics, it is very important. Title IX mandates, among other things, that sport departments give equal treatment to both men and women players. It also mandates procedures to fix accusations of sexual assault and harassment, domestic violence, dating murder and stalking. The new concept might make it more difficult for students who have committed misconduct to refute accusations. Colleges will no longer be required to maintain life trials that include cross-examination options. Institutions may rather maintain individual sessions with the accuser and the accused, with a school-appointed national asking questions. The parties had therefore receive recordings or transcripts from the school. A student may be able to participate electronically rather than in-person, yet when live hearings are held. One argument in favor of holding separate hearings is that if they do n’t have to confront their attacker again, survivors might be more likely to report incidents. When Title IX live hearings were mandated by the Trump administration, survivors ’ rights advocates criticized the move as undermining Title IX’s goals. On the other hand, the ability to fight the accuser is a cornerstone of the American legal system. The Confrontation Clause, which guarantees the right to fight witnesses in criminal trials, is a part of the Sixth Amendment. The main idea is that prosecutors should be able to evaluate the reliability and credibility of testimony and evidence before someone is found guilty. In a related vein, the U. S. In a situation where “important decisions turn on questions of fact, ” Supreme Court has ruled that “due process requires an opportunity to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. ” ” Title IX is not a legal laws, but its impact on students ’ life may prove serious. A university student accused of misconduct may be suspended, including from a sports team, or expelled. The loss of continued eligibility can be challenged in court as a denial of a protected property interest, even though there is no “right ” to play a college sport or even to attend college. Some research indicates that school athletes have, on average, encountered more issues with Title IX than another. According to an ESPN research conducted in 2018, school sports at Power Five universities are three times more likely than regular students to get accused of sexual misconduct. A college’s skill and, possibly, work to eliminate an athlete from a group surfaced earlier this year with a high-profile person. Terrence Shannon Jr., a watch at the University of Illinois, was suspended. after being charged with felony murder and criminal sexual power in Kansas following an reported event at a bar, he was a projected second round pick in the 2024 NBA draft. In accordance with court records, Shannon supposedly online penetrated a woman’s vagina without her consent and grabbed her buttocks. ” Shannon sued the university, which as a public school must meet Democratic protection, arguing it misapplied Title IX and other methods. Additionally, he argued that Illinois lacked the proper process, including his presumption of innocence. Agreeing with some of Shannon’s arguments, a federal judge issued an injunction against the college, which closed its investigation earlier this month. Shannon was reinstated. The scope of sexual harassment claim action is also expanded by the new Title IX rule. Currently, harassment must be “severe, pervasive and objectively offensive. ” But the new rule drops “objectively offensive, ” which means the harassment no longer must be offensive from an objective viewpoint (typically called the “reasonable person ” perspective in law ), and adopts “severe or pervasive. The quantity of evidence required to establish sexual harassment is also decreasing in some circumstances. Currently, universities can opt for the “clear and convincing evidence ” standard, which though lower than the “beyond a reasonable doubt ” standard used in criminal trials, is higher than the “preponderance of evidence ” ( more likely than not ) standard used in civil trials. According to the new regulations, schools must use preponderance of the evidence unless clear and convincing is used in “every other comparable proceedings, ” in which case the school may choose to use it. The new rule eschews the politically contentious issue of trans athletes ‘ eligibility to play sports, even though it explicitly states that sex-based harassment includes harassment over gender identity. That topic is at issue in federal litigation as well at the state government level, with 24 states banning transgender students from participating in sports consistent with their gender identity. Earlier this month, the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics effectively banned transgender athletes for all women’s sports other than for two co-ed sports, competitive cheer and competitive dance. Colleges are at a turbulent time as their legal relationship with athletes is slowly evolving as a result of the new Title IX rule. So far this year, an NLRB regional director has recognized Dartmouth College’s men’s basketball players as employees and those players unionized. A judge reviewing administrative law is determining whether USC football and men’s and women’s basketball players work for their respective institutions, conferences, and the NCAA. Last week, an advocacy group charged Notre Dame with an unfair labor practice for unlawfully using the “student-athlete” label. The U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is evaluating Johnson v. NCAA, a case where athletes argue they are employees. Meanwhile, NCAA president Charlie Baker has called for colleges to be able to directly pay athletes for their NIL and that approach will be the law of Virginia as of July 1. Since those athletes are students, colleges that pay them must adhere to Title IX because they are students, whether at those colleges ‘ choosing, as required by law, as in an employer-employee relationship, or via some other workplace vehicle. Colleges that pay football and/or men’s basketball players but do not pay other athletes are undoubtedly subject to Title IX litigation. They might also face legal action under the Equal Pay Act and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which both prohibit sex discrimination in employment and compensation. There has been talk of a number of college football programs merging into a “super league, ” where the employer might be a conference or professional league ( neither of which is governed by Title IX ) rather than a college ( which is governed by Title IX ), though the mechanics of that happening continue to be speculative and uncertain. The new rule does not address college athlete employment, NIL or pay-for-play compensation as standalone topics, but it does contain relevant language. Nothing in these regulations interferes with an employee’s right to use a grievance procedure set forth in a collective bargaining agreement to advance and protect their rights, it states. Additionally, the rule mentions rights that may be available in an institution-specific set of policies, such as those provided for students in an employment contract, handbook, or other institution-specific set of policies. In other words, a college employee-athlete can file a complaint about harassment or defend themselves from a claim through procedures specific to their employment relationship with the school. The rule cautions, however, that use of such rights must not “prevent ” a school from fulfilling its Title IX obligations.