Campus Discipline & Conduct

Every college must offer both parties a Title IX appeal on at least three grounds: procedural irregularity, new evidence, and conflict of interest or bias, each tied to the outcome. Retelling the story is not one of them.

Stalking has elements: a course of conduct, directed at a person, that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety or suffer substantial emotional distress.

Since the 2024 Title IX rule was vacated in January 2025, colleges must again hold a live hearing with cross-examination. You cannot ask the questions yourself; every one goes through your advisor, subject to a live relevance ruling.

Plagiarism accusations turn on documents that can be read, not detector scores. What a similarity report proves, whether intent is required, and what evidence clears a student.

An AI detector produces a probability, not proof. Unlike plagiarism there is usually no source document, only a software estimate and an instructor’s impression that the writing does not sound like you.

Interim suspensions and no-contact orders take effect before anyone decides whether you did anything. How they work and how they are challenged.

In a conflict between students, whoever reports first usually sets the frame, because the first report defines the file. Document early and in writing: dated emails, timestamped screenshots, a report filed the week it happened.

A Title IX finding can mean suspension or expulsion and a transcript notation, and the case moves faster than students expect. Each stage has a deadline, and evidence not submitted before the report closes is often excluded later.

Conduct cases are procedural cases: the school wrote the rules, and it either followed them or it did not. At some schools the “conduct meeting” is the hearing itself.

Academic misconduct cases turn on the school’s own integrity policy, the procedures it promised to follow, and the record you build before the first meeting. The evidence is often thinner than the accusation implies.