Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

January-11-99

Supreme Court to Hear School Sexual Harassment Case

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a school sexual harassment case tomorrow that will determine whether schools can be held liable for student-to-student sexual harassment under Title IX, a law which prohibits schools from discriminating on the basis of sex. The Court previously held that schools are liable for sexual harassment committed by teachers.

Ten-year-old LaShonda Davis, who is now 16, charged that a male classmate repeatedly grabbed her breasts and crotch area, simulated raping her and threatened her with rape several different times. Davis complained to her teacher and her Macon County, Georgia school's principal several times, but no action was taken to punish the boy who abused her, and she was forced to continue sitting next to him in class.

Davis filed a criminal complaint against the boy and he plead guilty to sexual battery. Given his juvenile status, the boy's sentence was not been publicly disclosed.

The National Women's Law Center represents Davis in the suit, which was filed to punish the school for ignoring Davis' pleas for help. NWLC co-president Marcia Greenberg commented on the impact the case could have on girls. She believes that if her client does not prevail in the case, the decision would "give schools a green light to ignore sexual harassment, no matter how severe."

Counsel for the school counter that, because Title IX lacks specific language about sexual harassment, the school cannot be held liable for student-to-student sexual harassment, noting that the Department of Education's guidelines on sexual harassment were not made available to schools until 1996.

Similar arguments were made women first attempted to sue their employers under Title VII, which prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. Despite objections that Title VII did not include specific references to sexual harassment among co-workers, the Supreme Court ruled that employers were responsible for employees who sexually harass their peers and that employees may sue employers under Title VII.

The plaintiff's mother, Aurelia Davis, has pledged to support her daughter in any way that she can. "I never wanted her to say that she went to everyone -- her teachers, her principal and her parents -- and they never did anything," said Ms. Davis.

Media Resources: AP - January 10, 1999


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/24/2014 Thousands of Women in Iran Protest Acid Attacks in Wake of Religious Law - On Wednesday, thousands of Iranians in the historic city of Isfahan gathered to protest recent acid attacks on women. . . .
 
10/24/2014 Potential Ballot Measure in DC Would Raise Minimum Wage to $15 - Low-wage workers in Washington, DC might see a significant increase in their pay, thanks to national labor rights group Restaurant Opportunities Center United (ROC). This month, the DC Board of Elections approved language submitted by a local chapter of ROC to raise the minimum wage in the District to $15/hour by 2019. . . .
 
10/23/2014 All of Tennessee's Major Newspapers Have Urged Voters to Reject Anti-Abortion Amendment 1 - All four of Tennessee's major papers have spoken out to oppose Amendment 1, a dangerous anti-abortion measure that will be decided by voters this fall. . . .