Title IX regulations include minimum standards for due process of institutions' internal Title IX proceedings and definitions of sex discrimination. This year, the Department of Education rescinded more expansive requirements and significantly limited those minimum requirements, similar to what they were under President Trump's first term. Additionally, the Department of Education enacted new hazing reporting requirements under the Stop Campus Hazing Act that must be included in the 2026 Annual Security Report (often referred to as the Clery Report) to meet the October reporting deadline.
Institutions should use this moment to confirm that their Title IX policies reflect the governing regulatory framework and evaluate whether their hazing prevention policies and reporting are prepped for increased scrutiny.
What Changed?
The 2020 Title IX framework is back in effect.
On September 29, 2026, the Department of Education formally rescinded the previously vacated 2024 Title IX Rule and recodified the 2020 framework, with modifications reflecting subsequent litigation. Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Educ., U.S. Department of Education Formally Rescinds the Biden Administration's Illegal Title IX Rewrite, Reinstating the 2020 Regulation (September 28, 2026). In effect, the rule narrows the definition of sexual discrimination to exclude discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy; requires in-person hearings for the investigation of sexual harassment; changes evidentiary standards to permit universities to use the clear-and-convincing evidence standard; requires live hearings with opportunity for direct cross-examination; and explicitly extends to conduct occurring in buildings owned or controlled by officially recognized student organizations, including fraternity and sorority houses.
This Rule change marks yet another pendulum swing in the modifications made to Title IX since the Obama administration, and a brief review of the history of these modifications informs the significance of this rule.
The Department of Education's 2011 and 2014 guidance issued during the Obama administration set the stage for increased requirements of Title IX enforcement and emphasized that the advent of a criminal investigation did not eliminate the school's independent Title IX obligations. These regulations pressed institutions to investigate sexual violence promptly, use a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard, and address hostile environment claims. This guidance also discouraged the direct questioning of an alleged victim by the accused student or respondent.
Yet, by 2017, with the policies of the first Trump administration, the 2011 and 2014 guidance was rescinded and the 2020 Rule was ultimately put into effect. In 2021, a federal court in Victim Rights Law Center v. Cardona vacated a provision of the Rule that barred decision-makers from considering statements not subject to cross-examination.
The Biden administration then enacted the 2024 Rule, which broadened Title IX to cover all forms of sex-based discrimination (including on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy), made live hearings and cross-examination optional, and expanded reporting obligations for employees. The 2024 Rule, however, was later enjoined and vacated in January of 2025. Within the first few months of the Trump administration's second term, the Department of Education announced that it would enforce the 2020 Rule, and in September 2026, the 2024 Rule was officially rescinded and the 2020 Rule was recodified with minor changes – including removal of the provision barring decision-makers from considering statements not subject to cross-examination.
With the constant changes to the Title IX regulations, it is no surprise that some universities have struggled to keep current. Now is a good time for institutions to review their Title IX policies and ensure that they comply with the current regulatory framework.
Hazing reporting and transparency obligations have expanded.
The Stop Campus Hazing Act, signed into law in December 2024, became the first federal law that created anti-hazing requirements for institutions of higher education. The law amended the Clery Act, expanding universities' obligations to report campus crime data to also include reporting of hazing statistics and prevention. Specifically, the Stop Campus Hazing Act requires institutions to (1) report statistics for hazing incidents reported to campus security or local law enforcement in the institution's Annual Security Report; (2) implement hazing policies addressing reporting, hazing prevention, and awareness programs; and (3) publish a "Campus Hazing Transparency Report" that summarizes findings concerning any student organization that violated the standards of conduct related to hazing.
Hazing statistics for 2025 must be included in the 2026 Annual Security Report by the October 1, 2026, reporting deadline.
What Should Institutions Do Now?
These developments create an opportunity for institutions to assess whether policies that may have been revised or developed during the changing Title IX landscape remain aligned with current requirements and whether campus systems adequately collect data on and address hazing and other serious student misconduct.
To ensure institutions are compliant, institutions should:
- Review and update Title IX practices and policies to align with the current administrative framework.
- Review and evaluate internal investigation practices as they pertain to Title IX and hazing complaints.
- Include hazing statistics in their 2026 Annual Security Report.
- Make necessary updates to Campus Hazing Transparency Reports, which must be publicly available and updated at least twice a year.
- Review hazing protocols, data collection, and reporting/transparency requirements and procedures.
Regulatory compliance, however, is only one part of the risk institutions face in the current climate. Recent campus investigations demonstrate that universities can face significant scrutiny over how they respond to alleged misconduct, including the quality of investigations, preservation and communication of evidence, oversight of student organizations, and coordination with law enforcement. Institutions should not wait for a significant allegation to test whether their policies and response protocols work together. A focused review now can identify gaps in policies, investigation procedures, evidence-sharing protocols, and crisis-response responsibilities before the institution is responding under heightened public and legal scrutiny.
Our companion alert, Campus Misconduct Investigations: Lessons for Colleges and Universities, examines recent incidents at several universities and the practical risk-management lessons they present.
Baker Donelson's higher education, white collar, and litigation lawyers regularly advise colleges and universities on Title IX and Clery compliance. If your institution would like a review of its campus safety, Title IX, and crisis response policies and protocols in light of recent developments, please contact a member of our team.