The provision was designed as an accountability measure to ensure that university management is aware of instances of sexual misconduct within their institution, said Elizabeth Abdnour, a Lansing, Michigan-based attorney who specializes in in Title IX cases and worked as a State of Michigan Title IX investigator during the Nassar investigation.
“The impetus was that if there are serial predators, we catch them earlier, and they don’t just wreak havoc for years and the administration, the people at the top, can say they didn’t know,” she said.
In the state of Michigan, some board members feel that the Title IX reporting review system was not followed properly. Board member Pat O’Keefe told the Detroit News in mid-September that the university “may have filed a false and misleading Certificate of Title IX Compliance” signed by Dr. Stanley.
Dr. Stanley pushed back against that accusation, telling professors at a Sept. 13 meeting that he had “faithfully complied with this Michigan certification process for the past two years and reviewed all Title IX reports. which were required”.
In June, he added, he was informed that “some of our board members may not have actually met their part of the state requirements in 2021.”
Dr. Stanley’s certification had been investigated by a law firm hired by the board. The investigation revealed procedural issues and Dr Stanley recertified the results, the council said in a statement released two weeks ago.
“It seems like a red herring to me,” Ms. Abdnour, Lansing’s lawyer, said of the board’s concerns about the certification process. If there were any issues with the signing process, she said, it would make more sense to raise concerns privately than to open an investigation.