Allison Joubert

HSA 6003-OF1 Higher Education Law

Dr. John Kaulfus

July 28, 2021

PART I

Mr. John Martin is an employee of St. Philip’s college. Mr. Martin is the Director of Student

Conduct/Title IX. He has been in the position for six years. Mr. Martin previously served as Director of

Student Life before his move to his current position. Mr. Martin can be reached by email at

jmartin139@alamo.edu or by phone at (210) 486-2746.

Interview Questions

1. How did you come to be in your current position?

Back in 2011 when the federal government enacted the new Title IX guidelines across the nation, Alamo

Colleges created positions to address the needs related to addressing incidences of campus sexual

assault, dating violence, stalking, and domestic violence. In 2015 he was hired into his role of Director of

Student Conduct based on his experience in campus housing (University of Texas at San Antonio) prior

to working within the Alamo Colleges. The position was created in 2014 out of a need to meet that

federal guideline.

2. What higher education legal matters have you spent the most time on in the last three years?

Matters related to the Title IX policies and regulations, particularly matters pertaining to civil rights

violations to include bullying, sexual harassment, dating violence, stalking, sexual assault and domestic

violence on the campus. St. Philip’s being a commuter (non-residential) campus, most matters deal with

civil rights violations and other harassing behavior. We have also had a few cases within our jurisdiction

which would address issues between two individuals connected to the college on a college facility.
 3. What are the higher education legal issues that you think will be most pressing in the next

three years?

On the horizon the topic of civil liberties, particularly things that deal with first amendment rights. What

we will begin to see in the national discourse around people being less politically correct. We will have

to recalibrate around free speech and civility on the campus. When students return to the campus post-

COVID that is going to be one of our major areas of redress coming back.

**I requested and example of this area of concern:

When we looked at the incident that occurred on January 6 th at the U.S. Capitol, the insurrection, it

began as a rally of supporters for a former president and thoughts of invalid election results, that

ultimately led to a protest at the capital. During the protest, mob rule took over and free speech turned

into an insurrection. The escalation from the presidential address to the invading of the capitol, that arc

of continuum was not very long. The escalation was steep. It culminated in the damage of federal

property, invading the capitol rotunda and the house floor, officers being overrun by the mob and as

well as murder. All of that started from a free speech demonstration and I think where people are

wanting to say whatever they want to say, and not understanding where the lines are as it relates to

free speech and what type of speech is considered hate speech, what type of speech is against the law

and what we will have to do in higher ed is to try to create a space where people can learn how to know

what the limits of the law are, but more importantly create an environment where people can express

civil discourse without being uncivil. I think that is where we are going to have legal issues because there

are going to be people who challenge these rules and our ability to limit speech. Because with the social

justice movement of last Summer around George Floyd, his murder and the defund the police activity as

it relates to society’s position around the militarization of the police force; all of these things are

creating a recipe for more uncivil interactions because people are wanting say whatever they want to
say. How that impacts the college environment is we are not allowed to make rules that deny people

their constitutional rights. When we are trying to govern civility and civil discourse, we are going to have

to be carful not to undermine people’s constitutional rights, particularly that’s related to free speech.

4. What can a person working in a college do to minimize involvement in a legal issue?

Know the rules, make sure that they are following the policies and guidelines and receiving proper

training on their positions and their job duties. If you are knowledgeable of your job and your functions,

chances are you are not going to violate someone’s rights or create a situation where legal recourse is

necessary. Also, having a cursory understanding of the law will also benefit.

5. If there is a legal issue, how should a college staff member prepare to meet with the attorney

representing the institution?

Having an understanding of what happened. Generally having a written account of what they are aware

of that transpired and the reason you want a written account is so as not to rely solely on memory and

are able to represent the incident consistently when having to recount what happened, over and over

again. To understand what your role is by listening. Oftentimes people in a legal situation want to begin

talking but waiting to understand what is expected of you, wait until you are asked questions and

answering the question you were asked. Try to answer the questions as thoroughly as possible without

being too lengthy in the response.

6. What methods are in place to ensure students are aware of student conduct policy?

Right now the only thing that we have is the student handbook and then we have student resource tools

like the all access guide, we try to get our faculty to share that information in their course syllabi.

7. Can you give examples of each level of higher ed law? Internal, local, city, state, federal that

influences your area of leadership?

Our board policy is our internal governance, it is what we have codified as an agreement with our

students and employment as appropriate behavior on our campus. The foundational pieces to that

document are state, federal and municipal and local laws. The language used is that this is a supplement

to those laws. An example of an internal policy is that students cannot have disruptive conduct that

occurs in the classroom. Meaning they cannot be engaged in conduct that will impede the delivery of

academic information to other students in the classroom setting. This is one of our policies. It is not

against the law at any level, but it is a rule that a student can be held accountable for on our campus and

it is pending on the extent to which the rule is violated or it is egregious as to the level of accountability

that we have at our disposal. We have anything from a verbal warning to a written warning and it goes

up to various levels of sanctioning, where there is some type of educational learning opportunity or

placement on academic probation or suspension depending on the degree of the violation.

8. What type of legal authority has been handed to your department?

We are the awareness and enforcement arm of the college’s judicial process. If a student is in violation

of our policies to include local, state or federal law, his office is designated as the office that holds them

accountable for that. So we adjudicate misconduct of any sort on the campus through student conduct.

If there is a law violated that requires law enforcement, then the person can be arrested and go to court

for those types of things as well. His office works in tandem with other areas of the campus to make

sure the rules, regulation and laws are followed.

**I read the case study that Mr. Bell presented to us in class and asked if Mr. Martin if he would give

his assessment of the appropriate actions.

I asked Mr. Martin what his first reaction to this would be:

The first thing is the student had already made the instructor aware of the concerning behavior initially

so there was a missed opportunity at that point to intervene before it became more egregious. What is

being described in this case study is sexual harassment and the behavior has deteriorated over time,

becoming more egregious as time goes by. One of the first things you do when someone is creating this

type of an environment, (sexual harassment), stop the behavior, he would immediately have done a no

contact order. The male student would be instructed that he could not have any interaction with the

female student during the investigation because it has been reported that he has sexually harassed her

on these occasions. The law requires that the accused is informed of what they are being accused of

and by whom. It would be a mutual no contact order which would inform the complainant that action is

being taken and they are able to return to class and not be harassed during the investigation. The

respondent is placed on notice that if the behavior continues, it will escalate for him quickly. That should

stop the behavior.

My question: Are there protections for this student for the missed classes that took place on the

behalf of the harassed student?

The faculty member is expected to work with the student in accordance with their guidelines for their

classroom. One of the challenges that is faced in this case study is had the instructor reported the

behavior when the student first brought it to their attention, the student may not have missed those

two classes. There was a delay in the response and the delay created the environment where the

behavior continued to escalate. There are some remedies; the student can request certain supports

because of their experience, we have to follow the academic policies of the college when it comes to

that. Because the speech was targeted, identified a person and violated her civil liberties, it is not

protected speech.

PART II Synopsis

The interview has exposed me to the fact that many of the concepts from our textbook are

being faced and addressed on our campus through the Title IX/Student Conduct office. It also revealed

how important compliance is to institutions who receive federal financial aid. I have read of previous

cases of institutions early on who discriminated against women and African Americans regarding

admissions, but when threatened to be cut from receiving federal financial aid, they quickly adjusted

their admission practices to include these once excluded populations. I gained understanding as to the

importance of knowing policy and procedure and being well trained in the position of employment that I

am assigned to and learning continuously the expectations of that position that cannot be captured in

the job description alone.

I was able to also understand how freedom of speech protections no longer apply to speech that

is targeted and violates another person’s rights. I had always wondered if people can really say
whatever they want without any recourse, but this interview helped me to see there are legal limits to

some speech.

Although I missed the second class, I was told that documentation was the strong concept

communicated in that class session. I found the importance of documentation highlighted in this

interview and the benefit of a written account of an incident that is invaluable to consistency and recall.

I was also able to see how much of what happens on campus especially with faculty and staff is meant to

provide protections against legal redress.

PART III – Lessons Learned

 Do not delay incident reporting

 Document as much as possible

 Having the ability to forecast legal issues that may begin to enter higher education by being

cognizant of what types of legal issues are occurring in society.

 Discover ways to increase student interest in the student handbook

 Higher ed had not been structured for lawsuits but are evolving quickly, we saw this in our

textbook early on of how institutions are increasing their legal departments in light of these

changes.