Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 858 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (10)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DeVos does her evil while we are focused on pandemic (Original Post)
Demovictory9
May 2020
OP
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)1. I so hate that woman.
Honestly, she is pure evil.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)2. They should not be messing with Title IX like that.
I despise her more than Stephen Miller, Jared, and Trump. She went after the GLBT community first thing when she took over. Now this. She is pure evil. Her and her family's right wing organization were behind the armed whiny babies pitching temper tantrums we keep seeing on courthouse and state capitol steps everywhere. She was the one who started that horror show too.
Demovictory9
(32,468 posts)3. 6 month countdown to get her out of there
Doreen
(11,686 posts)4. She obviously never has been sexually abused.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)8. I sincerely doubt that she has been sexually anything!
Buckeyeblue
(5,500 posts)5. How can she unilaterally change title IX?
Doesn't that require congressional/presidential approval? And if she is able to make such drastic changes, why has she waited so long?
In theory, Biden's SOE could roll these back as soon as they are confirmed, right?
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,574 posts)6. The Administrative Procedure Act
Administrative Procedure Act (United States)
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Pub.L. 79404, 60 Stat. 237, enacted June 11, 1946, is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations and grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions. It is one of the most important pieces of United States administrative law, and serves as a sort of "constitution" for U.S. administrative law.
The APA applies to both the federal executive departments and the independent agencies. U.S. Senator Pat McCarran called the APA "a bill of rights for the hundreds of thousands of Americans whose affairs are controlled or regulated" by federal government agencies. The text of the APA can be found under Title 5 of the United States Code, beginning at Section 500.
{snip}
Standard of judicial review
The APA requires that to set aside agency actions that are not subject to formal trial-like procedures, the court must conclude that the regulation is "arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law." However, Congress may further limit the scope of judicial review of agency actions by including such language in the organic statute. To set aside formal rulemaking or formal adjudication whose procedures are trial-like, a different standard of review allows courts to question agency actions more strongly. For such more formal actions, agency decisions must be supported by "substantial evidence" after the court reads the "whole record," which can be thousands of pages long.
Unlike arbitrary and capricious review, substantial evidence review gives the courts leeway to consider whether an agency's factual and policy determinations were warranted in light of all the information before the agency at the time of decision. Accordingly, arbitrary and capricious review is understood to be more deferential to agencies than substantial evidence review is. Arbitrary and capricious review allows agency decisions to stand as long as an agency can give a reasonable explanation for its decision based on the information that it had at the time. In contrast, the courts tend to look much harder at decisions resulting from trial-like procedures because they resemble actual trial-court procedures, but Article III of the Constitution reserves the judicial powers for actual courts. Accordingly, courts are strict under the substantial evidence standard when agencies acts like courts because being strict gives courts the final say, preventing agencies from using too much judicial power in violation of separation of powers.
The separation of powers doctrine is less of an issue with rulemaking that is not subject to trial-like procedures. Such rulemaking gives agencies more leeway in court because it is similar to the legislative process reserved for Congress. The courts' main role is then to ensure that agency rules conform to the Constitution and the agency's statutory powers. Even if a court finds a rule unwise, it will stand as long as it is not "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law."
{snip}
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Pub.L. 79404, 60 Stat. 237, enacted June 11, 1946, is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations and grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions. It is one of the most important pieces of United States administrative law, and serves as a sort of "constitution" for U.S. administrative law.
The APA applies to both the federal executive departments and the independent agencies. U.S. Senator Pat McCarran called the APA "a bill of rights for the hundreds of thousands of Americans whose affairs are controlled or regulated" by federal government agencies. The text of the APA can be found under Title 5 of the United States Code, beginning at Section 500.
{snip}
Standard of judicial review
The APA requires that to set aside agency actions that are not subject to formal trial-like procedures, the court must conclude that the regulation is "arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law." However, Congress may further limit the scope of judicial review of agency actions by including such language in the organic statute. To set aside formal rulemaking or formal adjudication whose procedures are trial-like, a different standard of review allows courts to question agency actions more strongly. For such more formal actions, agency decisions must be supported by "substantial evidence" after the court reads the "whole record," which can be thousands of pages long.
Unlike arbitrary and capricious review, substantial evidence review gives the courts leeway to consider whether an agency's factual and policy determinations were warranted in light of all the information before the agency at the time of decision. Accordingly, arbitrary and capricious review is understood to be more deferential to agencies than substantial evidence review is. Arbitrary and capricious review allows agency decisions to stand as long as an agency can give a reasonable explanation for its decision based on the information that it had at the time. In contrast, the courts tend to look much harder at decisions resulting from trial-like procedures because they resemble actual trial-court procedures, but Article III of the Constitution reserves the judicial powers for actual courts. Accordingly, courts are strict under the substantial evidence standard when agencies acts like courts because being strict gives courts the final say, preventing agencies from using too much judicial power in violation of separation of powers.
The separation of powers doctrine is less of an issue with rulemaking that is not subject to trial-like procedures. Such rulemaking gives agencies more leeway in court because it is similar to the legislative process reserved for Congress. The courts' main role is then to ensure that agency rules conform to the Constitution and the agency's statutory powers. Even if a court finds a rule unwise, it will stand as long as it is not "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law."
{snip}
The issuance of the regulations made LBN:
DeVos issues rules for sexual misconduct investigations in schools, bolstering protections for ...
I couldn't find the new final rule in the Federal Register. It seems that the final rule has been sent to the Federal Register for publication, but it has not yet been published. Here's the text of the unofficial document. It remains unofficial until it has been published. Please don't go calling up the contact person at Education to give him a piece of your mind. He's just a civil servant who sends documents to the Federal Register.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/titleix-regs-unofficial.pdf
Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal
Register. This document has been sent to the Office of the Federal Register but has not yet
been scheduled for publication.
4000-01-U
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 106
[Docket ID ED-2018-OCR-0064]
RIN 1870-AA14
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance
AGENCY: Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Secretary of Education amends the regulations implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX). The final regulations specify how recipients of Federal financial assistance covered by Title IX, including elementary and secondary schools as well as postsecondary institutions, (hereinafter collectively referred to as recipients or schools), must respond to allegations of sexual harassment consistent with Title IXs prohibition against sex discrimination. These regulations are intended to effectuate Title IXs prohibition against sex discrimination by requiring recipients to address sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination in education programs or activities. The final regulations obligate recipients to respond promptly and supportively to persons alleged to be victimized by sexual harassment, resolve allegations of sexual harassment promptly and accurately under a predictable, fair grievance process that provides due process protections to alleged victims and alleged perpetrators of sexual harassment, and effectively implement remedies for victims. The final regulations also clarify and modify Title IX regulatory requirements regarding remedies the Department may impose on recipients for Title IX violations, the intersection between Title IX, Constitutional protections, and other laws, the designation by each recipient of a Title IX Coordinator to address sex discrimination including sexual harassment, the dissemination of a recipients non-discrimination policy and contact information for a Title IX Coordinator, the adoption by recipients of grievance procedures and a grievance process, how a recipient may claim a religious exemption, and prohibition of retaliation for exercise of rights under Title IX.
DATES: These regulations are effective August 14, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
{snip}
Register. This document has been sent to the Office of the Federal Register but has not yet
been scheduled for publication.
4000-01-U
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 106
[Docket ID ED-2018-OCR-0064]
RIN 1870-AA14
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance
AGENCY: Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Secretary of Education amends the regulations implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX). The final regulations specify how recipients of Federal financial assistance covered by Title IX, including elementary and secondary schools as well as postsecondary institutions, (hereinafter collectively referred to as recipients or schools), must respond to allegations of sexual harassment consistent with Title IXs prohibition against sex discrimination. These regulations are intended to effectuate Title IXs prohibition against sex discrimination by requiring recipients to address sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination in education programs or activities. The final regulations obligate recipients to respond promptly and supportively to persons alleged to be victimized by sexual harassment, resolve allegations of sexual harassment promptly and accurately under a predictable, fair grievance process that provides due process protections to alleged victims and alleged perpetrators of sexual harassment, and effectively implement remedies for victims. The final regulations also clarify and modify Title IX regulatory requirements regarding remedies the Department may impose on recipients for Title IX violations, the intersection between Title IX, Constitutional protections, and other laws, the designation by each recipient of a Title IX Coordinator to address sex discrimination including sexual harassment, the dissemination of a recipients non-discrimination policy and contact information for a Title IX Coordinator, the adoption by recipients of grievance procedures and a grievance process, how a recipient may claim a religious exemption, and prohibition of retaliation for exercise of rights under Title IX.
DATES: These regulations are effective August 14, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
{snip}
brer cat
(24,591 posts)7. Spawn of Satan.