When it comes to school safety protocols in Dulles, Virginia, there are certain special considerations for students who have experienced harassment. The Department of Education has established restricted definitions of quid pro quo and sexual harassment in a hostile environment in Title IX. As such, the University must use these definitions to determine if sexual harassment constitutes a violation of Title IX. However, the University has determined that conduct that falls outside the definitions used in the Title IX Regulations may still constitute sexual harassment and therefore be a violation of the University's policy.
The actions of Youngkin and Miyares followed months of community outrage, mainly aimed at the decision of Loudoun school officials to move the aggressor student from a high school campus after his first assault, only to see him commit a second sexual assault on the second campus five months later. Charge V, also brought against the School Board and Howard, alleges gross negligence in violation of Virginia law. Occasionally he spent time with students outside the school campus and after school hours, on golf outings and at home. The jury determined that there was no “coordinated cover-up” of the assaults between Loudoun school officials and the school board.
In one example, the Loudoun County juvenile admission office was required to notify the Loudoun superintendent that the student involved in the assaults had been formally charged with a crime. The plaintiffs' concessions leave Count I (Title IX, against the School Board); Counts II, III, and IV (§ 1983, against the School Board and Howard); Count V (gross negligence, against the School Board and Howard); and Counts VI, VII, and VIII (assault, assault, and intentionally inflicting emotional distress, respectively, against the School Board) as the only charges at issue. Therefore, the School Board is immune to plaintiffs' tort lawsuits, regardless of whether those claims are considered simple negligence, gross negligence, or intentional tort. For instance, the complaints allege that a sixth-grade boy told Graham in 1992 that Christian was a child molester and that a member of the elementary school administrative staff also came forward to express concern.
It is a violation of University policy to engage in sexual assault, quid pro quo sexual harassment, sexual harassment in hostile environments, sexual exploitation, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, and complicity in committing any act prohibited by this policy or retaliation against a person for reporting in good faith any of these forms of conduct or participating in any investigation or proceeding under this policy. Virginia courts have also recognized that school boards are branches of the state that play a vital governmental function and are therefore protected by sovereign immunity. It's not usual for a special grand jury to publish a report with its findings; Virginia law doesn't require the jury to do so, but jurors wrote that overwhelming public interest in the case, as well as Loudoun's desire to improve Loudoun's handling of sexual assaults in schools, forced them to prepare the report. In conclusion, it is essential for students who have experienced harassment to be aware of special considerations when it comes to school safety protocols in Dulles, Virginia.
All GWPD incident reports involving students reporting sexual violence (including sexual harassment) must be taken into account when determining if sexual harassment constitutes a violation of Title IX. Additionally, it is important for students to be aware of their rights under Virginia law when it comes to filing complaints against their school board.