MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Star-Crossed Student Athletes Torn Apart By Title IX Witchhunt at USC

Zoe Katz comes forward to clear the name of her boyfriend, former USC football star Matt Boermeester.

Zoe Katz/InstagramZoe Katz/InstagramA nosy neigbor's word was apparently all it took to get a University of Southern California (USC) student kicked out of school for abusing his girlfriend—abuse she vehemently denies ever took place.

According to recent USC graduate Zoe Katz, the inquiry that prompted USC to expel Matt Boermeester, a former kicker on the USC football team, was "horrible and unjust." Katz said she is coming forward now to clear Boermeester's name and push for changes in the way Title IX investigations are conducted.

In a statement provided to the press through her lawyer, Katz alleges that Boermeester was "false accused" of abusing her after a neighbor saw them roughhousing in her front yard.

The two seniors had been dating for more than a year at that point; from the looks of Katz's recent social media posts, they're still together. Katz was a star on the school's tennis team, and Boermeester was the football player who had kicked the game-winning field goal for USC in this year's Rose Bowl.

According to Katz, the neighbor told his roommate what he thought he saw, who told a coach in the USC athletic department, who reported the incident to the school's Title IX office (the unit tasked, per federal mandate, with investigating suspected incidents of sex-based discrimination and violence). The school began an investigation into the allegations in February, at which time Boermeester was suspended from the football team and from school.

At the time, Katz tweeted: "I am the one involved in the investigation with Matt Boermeester. The report is false." Since then, she was mostly silent on the issue in public, until this week's statement. In it, she states unequivocably that she has "never been abused, assaulted, or otherwise mistreated by Matt."

Zoe Katz/InstagramZoe Katz/Instagram

But the school refused to believe her, says Katz. Instead, investigators immediately cast her as someone in an abusive relationship who was too afraid to tell the truth about her situation.

The Title IX crew was "dismissive and demeaning," said Katz. They told her she "must be afraid of Matt," a charge she denied. In classic witch-hunt style, any protestations on Katz's part were taken as further evidence of the exact opposite of what she was saying:

When I told the truth about Matt, in repeated interrogations, I was stereotyped and was told I must be a 'battered' woman, and that made me feel demeaned and absurdly profiled. I understand that domestic violence is a terrible problem, but in no way does that apply to Matt and me.

Ultimately, Katz felt "misled, harassed, threatened and discriminated against" by the school's Title IX office.

During Boermeester's suspension, he was barred from returning to campus and from having contact with Katz. Eventually, he was told not to return.

In a statement to the Los Angeles Times, USC would only say that it had concluded its investigation and could not comment further. "Per the register, [Boermeester] is no longer enrolled at the university," it said.

As Democrats attempt to depict any changes to Title IX policy as some sort of typical Trump attack on women's rights, Katz's story provides yet another example how wrong they are.

Photo Credit: Zoe Katz/Instagram

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Crusty Juggler - Hero||

    Fact: women do not possess the ability to think for themselves.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    I saw Big Little Lies and I disagree.

  • BYODB||

    The only exception to the absolutely true statement of 'women can not think for themselves' is when they are a Title IX officer. True story.

  • Rhywun||

    Thigh-High Politics is an op-ed column by Teen Vogue writer Lauren Duca that breaks down the news, provides resources for the resistance, and just generally refuses to accept toxic nonsense.

    It's tough for today's teens in Occupied America.

    Run. For. Office.

    Is there some sort of Teen Congress I'm not aware of?

  • B.P.||

    Problem is, some of these youngsters surely read this crap and believe it.

    Also, be sure to read Ms. Duca's how-to guide on anal sex for Teen Vogue.

  • Zeb||

    Well, if you are going to do anal sex, it's pretty important to do it right.

  • Crusty Juggler - Hero||

    Wrong. The best way to experiment with any sexual act is to just wing it.

  • Zeb||

    Or just imitate what happens in porn videos. Girls' assholes all come pre-lubed and ready to go, right?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Victimhood is power, and with great power comes great responsibility. This woman has a great responsibility to maintain and not threaten the entire power structure that has been carefully built up over the past several years.

  • Long Woodchippers||

    Being a victim means that nothing is ever your fault.

  • Radioactive||

    I smell lawsuit...

  • Tom Bombadil||

    Shouldn't be long before we see video of Matt both running and laughing on his way to the bank.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    It's hard to say for sure without knowing her, but this girl sounds like a keeper.

  • ||

    At the very least, would.

  • Brian||

    I don't know about you, but when I see a man and a woman roughhousing in a backyard, I shoot first and ask questions later.

    And, if he's still alive after the questions, I crucify him.

  • ||

    That was a Shakespeare In The Park rehearsal of A Streetcar Named Desire you moron!

  • Citizen X - #6||

    STELLAAAAA!

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    One of your felines doing something she shouldn't?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Sexual assault with a concrete dildo?!?

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    Sure!

  • ||

    Sexual assault with a concrete dildo?!?

    Kinky! But I like my sex the way I play basketball, one on one and with as little dribbling as possible.

  • RabbitHead||

    Is "shoot first" a new euphemism for surreptitiously wanking?

  • juris imprudent||

    Han... Solo? Could it be any clearer?

  • Galane||

    The cast of the little know X-Rated version of Star Wars. Hand Solo, Luke Skyjerker, Princess Laid-er.

  • GreenLibertarian||

    Open season on martial art students practicing in public. How ironic would it be to shoot up a self defense course for women in a public park?

  • Domestic Dissident||

    The short version: USC (like almost all modern American universities) is a logic and reason free zone completely controlled by man-hating feminazi scum like Elizabeth Nolan Brown.

    Ironic, isn't it?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    I'm wondering what God did wrong to end up with a world in which you exist.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    Too bad Twitter is an open forum, asshole. "Roughhousing" might be OK with Lizzie, but if Boermeester had jokingly told Katz something like "make me a sandwich", she'd be right there calling for his dismissal from the school. She's no different than these university star chambers.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Those one-dimensional cartoons that you argue with in your tiny head seem like pretty annoying people, Mikey.

  • ...||

    Too bad ENB just proved him right this weekend.

    Kind of makes you look like a stupid asshole.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Aww, Simple Mikey's got a friend! That's sweet.

  • ...||

    I just dont understand why the guy upsets you so much that you follw him around all day every day, pulling at his pants leg.

  • Sevo||

    "I just dont understand why the guy upsets you so much that you follw him around all day every day, pulling at his pants leg."

    I'm sure you make it a point to feed the vermin in your home.

  • ...||

    He's a fuckkng troll, you senile retard, replying to him and giving him attention IS feeding him.

  • BYODB||

    Another new sock puppet? Geez, that gets old.

  • Crusty Juggler - Hero||

    Thanks for continuing to fight the good fight, Mikey!

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    Mikey woke up on the wrong (left) side of the bed today.

  • Brian||

    Stop white knighting, you betas.

  • ...||

    You're not wrong.

  • jelabarre||

    but if Boermeester had jokingly told Katz something like "make me a sandwich", she'd be right there calling for his dismissal from the school.

    But if he said "sudo make me a sandwich" it would have been ok... https://xkcd.com/149/

  • Idle Hands||

    Like rain on your wedding day?

  • KerryW||

    It's a freeeee ride when you've already paid

  • ||

    "man-hating feminazi scum like Elizabeth Nolan Brown."

    Apart from possibly being enjoyable for you, idiocy does not further whatever argument you may want to bring. It'd be ironic, if you were trying to bring one.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Women do not lie about being abused but they do lie about not being abused, apparently.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Should be reply to JoeM below.

  • ||

    Awesome. Title IX ostensibly protects women, but ends up disregarding a woman's viewpoint entirely. Too perfect.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    Because feminazis aren't interested in protecting women nearly as much as they're interested in punishing men.

    And if it's a WHITE man, then look out because that's like the world's most delicious cherry on top of their sundae.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    It's more like they genuinely can't believe that anyone could possibly disagree with them, so anyone who does must be damaged or evil. They are exactly like the middle class women of the late Victorian and Edwardian era who could;t believe that a woman would choose an admittedly degrading, but lucrative, job as a whore over 'honest' (and poorly paid) work as a servant or washerwoman.

    And like those Victorian women, they fear women who enjoy sex, because such women make it hard for them to hold men.

  • esteve7||

    Very SJW. Yeah we love Women and , right until they stop supporting us. Remember the fury when they realized that white women voted for Trump more than Hillary?

    Yeah when they talk about all these groups of people, all they care about is you toeing the party line. When you step out you are dead to them.

  • geo1113||

    There's that but also Title IX coordinator/administrator is one of the more highly compensated staff positions in the university world.

  • Brian||

    I would hope so.

    How they don't try to blow their own brains out every day at work is beyond me.

    I think that's part of why BS like this happens: they need something to avoid the monotony.

  • ||

    I don't think this really has anything to do with feminism. It's more like typical bureaucratic inertia, ass-covering, and mission creep.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Look at you, all talking to Simple Mikey like he's not the angriest guy on the short bus.

  • ...||

    God damn, charge the fucking guy some rent at least.

  • ||

    Who develops anti-discrimination law, harassment law, etc.? Feminists. Particularly academic feminists. Who is likely to "man" Title IX positions? Can't go much safer than to put a feminist there -- not to mention that they will want to be put there and make up the mass of those familiar with "the state of the art" anyway. So, yeah it has something to do with feminism.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    It has EVERYTHING to do the feminazis, and their hatred of normal, heterosexual men and anything to do with what they nowadays like to call "toxic masculinity".

    The fact that the poor bastard is a football player probably makes him the greatest hide on the wall of their sorry-ass, worthless careers. He's the modern day feminazi equivalent of Teddy Roosevelt going on an African safari and taking down a huge rhino charging straight at him.

  • Tionico||

    AND keeping their high paying cush work-free jobs wrangling inordinate power over men. A sort of self-justification to assure a continuing "need" for their services.

    That word "service" reminds me of the story my Dad told me, from back when he was about 12 or so. Seems it fell to him each year to slip a halter onto their milk cow and walk her up the road to the neighbour's farm to "get serviced" by their bull. Since then, having observed the meaning of the word "service" he always associated it with that meaning.... he particularly got reminded of that every year when it was time to pay the Infernal RobbingYou Service........

  • Long Woodchippers||

    Title IX provided for equal opportunity in accessing educational and sport programs on campus.

    Then the folks in Washington decided it covered students having sex.

    Now it covers a man shoving a woman.

  • ||

    "Now it covers a man shoving a woman."

    Well, maybe that just extended what counts as "sport program".

  • widget||

    Katz was a star on the school's tennis team,

    So, she has at least one arm that could knock an average man unconscious with a single blow.

  • colorblindkid||

    Seeing as he's a kicker, she's probably got a better left hook than he does.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    If he's like most kickers, any female tennis player could snap him like a twig.

  • ||

    It's hard to say if any abuse actually happened. Domestic violence cases are notoriously difficult to prosecute because the women very often denies that it happened. It's just that it's not USC's job to determine if it did or to protect possible abuse victims if they don't want to acknowledge it. The best they can do is set up a domestic violence shelter. Trying to step in and become surrogate-cop with fewer rules is not going to work out well.

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    I support a women's right to choose to remain in a physically abusive relationship, because I am a real libertarian.

  • ||

    It sounds wierd, but that's pretty much how it has to work, doesn't it? Putting aside the lack of legal proof that any abuse occurred, can the state force someone to break up with their boyfriend/girlfiend/spouse on the basis of prior domestic violence convictions?

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, if a victim doesn't want to press charges or provide evidence, what can you do? Especially if there is no obvious sign of abuse besides someone observing some behavior that could be perfectly innocent.

    The worry is that a victim of abuse might be coerced into denying that there is any abuse, I suppose. But without any obvious signs of abuse, again what can you do?

    Then there are plenty of mutually abusive couples. If they choose to stay together, is that anyone's business?

  • Crusty Juggler - Hero||

    Then there are plenty of mutually abusive couples. If they choose to stay together, is that anyone's business?

    If the Ray Rice situation taught us anything it is that a couple's relationship is everyone's business.

  • Long Woodchippers||

    The school told him he was not allowed to have contact with his girlfriend (or else)

  • Tionico||

    no. The FIrst Article of Ammendment of our COnstitution guarantees us the right to free association. It was this man's right to associate with this women, and she with him, and the school, on insufficient evidence and NO due process of law, denied them that right.

    One more item in a nice big Federal lawsuit against the school and against eash of the harridans who mock-tried him then convicted and sentenced him with no due process of law.
    These rights-violating Title Nine demons need to be sued, and denied their own due process... fair's fair, right?

  • Dan S.||

    Actually, to be honest, the First Amendment says nothing about the general right to free association. It mentions "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances", but that basically means the right to have protest demonstrations. I do certainly think that freedom of association is an inherent part of liberty, and that the college has no business trying to limit it. Perhaps it is one of the unenumerated rights referred to in the Ninth Amendment, but it really isn't in the First.

  • Ron||

    the school should have nothing to do with it. if aa person on campus or anywhere sees violence they should call the cops not some campus lackey

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Female victims are to be believed, no matter how overwhelming the evidence against their allegations might be. But a female victim who claims not to be a victim is obviously speaking out of fear, so her testimony can be dismissed summarily.

    Men, of course, cannot ever be victims.

  • widget||

    You didn't read ENB's article.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    What is this "read the article" of which you speak?

  • geo1113||

    Sometime I go back and look and notice tidbits like the guys fucking roommate ratted him out to a coach.

  • LarryA||

    According to Katz, the neighbor told his roommate what he thought he saw, who told a coach in the USC athletic department, who reported the incident to the school's Title IX office

    I read that as the neighbor told his (the neighbor's) roommate what he (the neighbor) saw, and the neighbor's roommate told the coach.

  • ...||

    If he didn't read it, how did he summarize it so perfectly?

  • geo1113||

    The title of the article says it all.

  • ...||

    Try again.

  • widget||

    Retract, Chippah. Didn't read your post carefully. There ya go!

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Whoops, noted. All good.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Of course I did. I'm summarizing the attitudes of the feminist dullards who think five out of every four women who go to college are raped.

  • ||

    The "female victim" in this case claims that no abuse actually happened. The school just chooses not to believe her.

  • Microaggressor||

    #BelieveHer

  • juris imprudent||

    She is a woman, she has no agency. She only has the role assigned to her by society.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Women never lie when they accuse a man of abusing them. Also, women always lie when they deny a man abused them.

  • ||

    Why are the schools trying to do police work?
    If there's a domestic violence incident, that's a matter for the police.

    It's also a bizarre application of Title IX to interfere in a woman's right to have a relationship with a particular guy, even if it might be abusive. Is Title IX supposed to be protecting women from themselves now? Maybe we should go back to the 1920s and have sex-segregated dorms and chaperoned parties.

  • Crusty Juggler - Hero||

    Is Title IX supposed to be protecting women from themselves now?

    Yes, that is exactly right.

  • geo1113||

    We will tell you how you feel and goddammit you will like it!!!

  • ||

    Seriously though. If they're going to take this position... why not segregated dorms???.

    If rape is such a big problem on campus, and girls need to be in a non-sexually-threatening environment, that ought to be the number one thing to look at. What could make women feel safer than to have women only dorms with locks on the doors?

  • Chipper Morning, Now #1||

    Make panty raids great again!

  • ||

    Yes! It's more fun when sex is forbidden and the women are under lock and key.

  • Crusty Juggler - Hero||

    It's a logic-free, consequences-free* "have our cake and eat it, too" philosophy.

    *Until the recent spate of lawsuits that have been brought against them, but fuck it, they aren't the ones paying.

  • Ron||

    and while we are segregating lets make them wear burkas as well. its the only way to be sure.

  • ||

    Chastity belts. Women can't be left at the mercy of their own bad choices.

  • ||

    What could make women feel safer than to have women only dorms with locks on the doors?.

    Title IX witch hunts?

  • BYODB||

    Well, for one they fully acknowledge that a non-insignificant number of women like to have sex with other women so really the only solution is to lock everyone's doors from the outside at 9pm each evening. Y'know, because a lesbian is basically a man.

    /sarc

  • ||

    Why are the schools trying to do police work?
    ...
    It's also a bizarre application of Title IX to interfere in a woman's right to have a relationship with a particular guy, even if it might be abusive.

    Unfortunately, what's going to have to happen is this exact same case except the woman gets assaulted or worse. Probably multiple times. Only once the false accusations are the demonstrable cause or trigger for harm. Otherwise, it's going to continue to be a question of any given individual victim's rights vs. the 1-in-5 collective. The fact that the University took action based on vague heresay from a (student?) neighbor should be a bright red flag to all manner of attorney even tangentially involved with similar situations.

  • ||

    Unfortunately, what's going to have to happen is this exact same case except the woman gets assaulted or worse.

    That is, assaulted or worse *after* the University has either tipped its hand, levied punishment, or otherwise situated themselves such that they are playing law enforcement rather than actually enforcing the law.

  • Rhywun||

    Why are the schools trying to do police work?

    Probably strings attached to federal aid.

  • Longtobefree||

    Actually, they are not trying to do police work. Police work involves evidence, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
    Title IX requires merely an anonymous accusation, and theoretically a preponderance of evidence. In this case, even the preponderance of evidence is abandoned.

  • GreenLibertarian||

    At least the criminal justice system provides some extent of presumption of innocence. Expensive lawsuits could escalate to SCOTUS which, by precedent, could take some of the teeth out of Title IX, or at least make schools afraid to prosecute.

  • LarryA||

    Lawsuits are civil, not criminal matters, and AFAIK don't get anywhere near SCOTUS.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Good luck with enforcing that now that womsnhoid is a subjective rather than objective status.

  • Calidissident||

    Ugh not a good look for my alma mater.

    Although I do have to say, ENB, the guy is/was not a star. Pretty mediocre kicker. Did hit a clutch FG against Penn State though, so I'll always appreciate that.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Weird, wild stuff.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    The narrative is much more important that any one person's situation; the narrative being that women are victimized by predatory males, which is anyone who hasn't seen and agreed with The Vagina Monologues [i.e., "vagina friendly" and psychologically emasculated and harmless in all respects]. So toward this end any instance that can be construed as abusive must be; the greater good trumps individual rights.

  • ||

    " the neighbor told his roommate what he thought he saw, who told a coach in the USC athletic department, who reported the incident to the school's Title IX office"

    USC is a private university. It appears the neighbor was just "using the free market" (as did the roommate, as did the coach, as did the school)*. So nothing to aobject to here. Or is does that just end all considerations to when it comes to speech that is deemed offensive? Would it have been fine if the neighbor had reported a sexist joke (using such intermediaries) and the university had expelled the guy over it? (Bonus question, would that have been countering sexist speech with speech, on part of the neighbor?)

    *I actually hold it's not the free market. Note the parallel role of Titles VII and IX. Even worse in case of VII, as it doesn't "just" work through withholding funds.

  • ||

    Correction: [So, nothing to object to here. Or does that just end all considerations]

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Are you insinuating that Ms Brown's reportage of this story is not also "using the free market"? Do you tell your friends to piss off if they recommend that you don't go shopping at Walmart? Because hey, Walmart is a private business.

  • ||

    "Are you insinuating that Ms Brown's reportage of this story is not also "using the free market"?"

    I've decribed the scenario. I don't see where you find the insinuation, Spark. - I'm answering your question to see what you have in mind: I would say she is. Her employers are.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Or is does that just end all considerations to when it comes to speech that is deemed offensive? Would it have been fine if the neighbor had reported a sexist joke (using such intermediaries) and the university had expelled the guy over it? (Bonus question, would that have been countering sexist speech with speech, on part of the neighbor?)

    You posted three questions, was the point of them:

    a. To get answers from Elizabeth?
    b. To be rhetorical to make a point?

  • ||

    I want these questions answered, that means from anyone who has something worthwhile to say. Most questions contain "points", more so a web of questions. Rarely is there complete neutrality, so there is a rhetorical aspect. -- That, by the way, applies to yours. Yes, there is a particular interest in an answer from her, though not answering here is not necessarily a bad sign.

  • Hail Rataxes||

    No, he's just butthurt about sandwiches and wants to imply that ENB threatened to tattle to the EEOC on someone.

  • ||

    I hold no grudge against sandwiches.

    There's no covert implicitness. I disagreed with her recourse to employers. Look up the details of that event yourself. I have stated the things I want to address here completely, for the moment.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    So it's not the free market, but what if it were?

  • ||

    That raises the question of whether one should one use (free) market forces that aren't speech (eg threat of unemployment) to counter speech. There's a problem of separating speech (idea) and speaker, too.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Not sure what constitutes a "threat of unemployment," nor why it would not qualify as speech. (the "threat" part certainly sounds like it) If it's an employer threatening unemployment, that would qualify as exercise of free association. But if it's a third party, how is it not speech?

  • ||

    Try this.

    A: "Renewable energy is better than nuclear energy."
    B: "Release the hounds!"

    You are right that, for the employer, it is a matter of free association. Well, possibly, it's complicated by anti-discrimination law. - Telling someone that he should not employ A is speech. But it's not speech in the sense of matching idea with idea, The characteristic element, the weight, lies outside of the realm of thought and persuasion, it's in actually hindering employment. It's not a battle of ideas. It's preempting a battle of ideas with the threat of unemployment. It's seeking to destroy (and/or scare) the (prospective) speaker, and the message before it is uttered.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    According to Katz, the neighbor told his roommate what he thought he saw, who told a coach in the USC athletic department, who reported the incident to the school's Title IX office (the unit tasked, per federal mandate, with investigating suspected incidents of sex-based discrimination and violence).

    I don't live in the greatest neighborhood. One day while I was out in front of my house, I saw a car pull up to the bus stop across the street, a woman got out of the passenger seat and sat at the bust stop, a young man got out of the driver's seat and began wailing on the woman, closed-fist, while she screamed. I called 911. Should I have called a Title IX office?

  • ||

    "But the school refused to believe her, says Katz. Instead, investigators immediately cast her as someone in an abusive relationship who was too afraid to tell the truth about her situation."

    Apparently, it is wrong that there is "no perfect victim". It's even getting difficult to conjure up a female who is not a "perfect victim".

  • Longtobefree||

    "Ultimately, Katz felt "misled, harassed, threatened and discriminated against" by the school's Title IX office."

    So, it seems she has a perfect Title IX case against the entire Title IX office staff. File it, girl, file it!

  • Dillinger||

    every day something at h&r too stupid to believe.

  • MaleMatters||

    Sue, sue, sue. And when you get tired of that, sue.

  • Bischkva||

    If ever anyone deserved a $10 million settlement it's these two young people.

  • Bischkva||

    Scary, frightening, Orwellian, Stalinesque. This is our future, folks. BTW Reason: keep bashing Trump and you'll get exactly more of this in 2021.

  • Paco||

    So USC tries to ruin a man's life based on hearsay testimony four times removed. UC staff from top to bottom should be sued out of existence.

  • Longtobefree||

    But it is for the children! As dictated by a federal bureaucrat without any due process at all. But they are democrats, so it is OK.

  • Tionico||

    so these two were having a mutually approved session of cavorting on her front lawn, someone else saw it, jumped to confusions, told someone ELSE, who tolkd the Title Nine Pigs, and THEY summarily executed the male half of the pair.......

    Justice? No way. Our Constitution overrides any later laws passed, including thje twisted "interpretations" now applied in Title Nine debacles. One, such as this young man, MUST have opportunity to present his OWN witnesses in support of his innocence, AND examine any witnesses his accusers present to try and build a case. Further, he must also be able to be tried by a JURY of his peers.... which in this case should most accurately be mostly male college students. These rights were unjustly denied him

    Now his partner in the fun has come forward, and the stupid scool STILL refuses to back down. Whut we hayuv heah is uh FAILYAH ta c'myoonacayt. Those school witchhunters need to be taken down. I'd think a federal lawsuit against the school and the individual administrators as individuals and in their official capacities, for denial of his civil rights under the US Constitution.

  • LarryA||

    The school will play their "Title IX says we have to" ace. Then you're expecting a Federal Judge to rule against Title IX. Good luck.

  • p3orion||

    Just want to point out: this was at Southern Cal, NOT at USC, which is the University of South Carolina, a school that was a university before Califoirnia was even a STATE.

    Go Cocks.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online