Part of class-action suit saying Brown failed to protect students from assault moves forward
PROVIDENCE – A lawsuit claiming that Brown University failed to protect female students from sexual harassment and assault can move forward in part, a federal judge ruled this week.
Four former students filed a federal class action suit in August 2021 alleging that the university systemically and repeatedly failed to protect women from harm, including rape, despite knowing that sexual assault on campus is “endemic.” Two current students later joined the suit.
The university moved to dismiss the suit in March.
On Oct. 18, U.S. District Court Judge John J. McConnell Jr. allowed the plaintiffs’ claim for injunctive relief to go forward but denied their efforts to seek monetary relief. The plaintiffs were enrolled between 2018 and 2021.
What the courts said before: Appeals court upholds settlement in landmark Brown gender-equity case
Brown University and protecting female students: Lawsuit: Brown University failed to protect women from sexual misconduct
The plaintiffs can sue to force Brown to “ensure that the Title IX office receives, investigates and resolves complaints.” The plaintiffs must still prove that their suit meets the criteria for class action certification.
Title IX protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or in activities that receive federal financial assistance.
Title IX, a 'political football'? Rules around sexual assault on campus could change again
McConnell granted several of Brown’s motions, dismissing the students' claims of “pre-assault” or “heightened risk.” The plaintiffs claimed that Brown’s actions – or, in some cases, inaction – created a climate in which female students were at heightened risk for sexual assault and harassment.
McConnell also dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims of negligence, negligent supervision, negligent failure to warn, train or educate and breach of fiduciary duty.
Housing in Rhode Island: How a Pawtucket man lost his $160,000 childhood home over a $1,182 water bill.
McConnell, however, denied the university’s motion to dismiss “post-assault” claims, which refer to the measures Brown takes after an assault is reported.
The judge refused to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, which they allege was caused by the university’s mishandling of their Title IX claims.
What do the former Brown students say happened?
Five of the six plaintiffs remain in the suit. One plaintiff's claims were dismissed by McConnell.
“We are very pleased with this decision and its recognition that a proposed injunctive class can go forward,” said Irene Lax, senior counsel with the law firm Grant & Eisenhofer in New York City. “We’re pleased that the court acknowledged that we plausibly alleged claims for deficiencies in Brown’s Title IX process.
“We want female students to have a non-hostile and safe environment,” she said Friday. “This lawsuit is extremely important in taking steps to make that happen.”
Legalizing Marijuana: Will marijuana dispensaries be allowed in your RI town? November's election will decide.
How the university is reacting
In a statement, Brown spokesman Brian Clark said, “The judge’s decision in Soenen v. Brown dismisses the majority of the plaintiffs’ claims at the outset and significantly narrows the scope of the case.
“Brown’s focus remains on education, prevention and encouraging a culture in which community members intervene to prevent incidents, provide support and resources, report misconduct, seek assistance and trust in a fair, impartial process to resolve complaints," Clark said.
"On the remaining claims, Brown has a strong case to present to the court through the judicial process.”
Linda Borg covers education for The Journal.
This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: Brown University Title IX suit can move forward, judge rules.
