Stanford University Title IX Lawyer

Stanford is a world-class university with a complex Title IX system that touches students, faculty, staff, and visitors. If you or your student is facing a report of sexual assault, dating violence, stalking, or harassment, or if you are seeking accountability as a complainant, you deserve precise guidance that understands both federal law and California’s unique rules. Saland Law is led by criminal lawyer and former prosecutor Jeremy Saland, and our practice advises both respondents and complainants through the investigation, hearing, and appeal phases of campus proceedings. Although headquartered in New York City, we handle Title IX matters nationwide, including Stanford cases that involve dating violence, stalking, sexual assault and questions of affirmative consent.

Why Stanford Title IX cases are different

Title IX is federal law, but Stanford’s processes exist in a California overlay and within the university’s own policy framework. That means three layers can shape your case. First comes federal Title IX and its regulations in 34 C.F.R. Part 106. Second comes state law, including California’s SB 493 and California Education Code section 67386, which impose additional procedures and adopt an affirmative consent standard for colleges and universities that receive state funds. Third comes Stanford’s policies and definitions, administered by the SHARE Title IX and Title VI Office. Understanding how these layers interact is essential because deadlines, evidence rules, and the way credibility is tested can differ from schools in other states.

Who we help and how we approach Stanford matters

As Title IX advisors, we represent respondents who face allegations of sexual misconduct, sexual assault, sexual contact without consent, stalking, or relationship violence, and we represent complainants who seek a fair, trauma-informed process that results in prompt, equitable remedies. Our work balances campus strategy with criminal law awareness. As a former prosecutor and current criminal defense attorney, Jeremy Saland understands how statements made on campus can affect a parallel criminal investigation. That experience helps us protect your rights, frame your position, and avoid unnecessary risk while still engaging cooperatively with campus officials.

Our approach is hands-on. We map the Stanford process early, build a timeline of events, gather documents and messages, contact witnesses, and prepare clients for interviews and hearings. For complainants, we help draft clear, focused reports and work closely on supportive measures and ongoing remedies. For respondents, we develop evidence of consent, address the meaning of affirmative consent in California as it relates to your proceeding, and prepare clients on how to answer questions about sexual contact, alcohol use, and communication before and after the encounter.

The legal framework you will encounter

Title IX basics and core statutes

Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs that receive federal financial assistance. The heart of the statute appears at 20 U.S.C. section 1681(a). Regulations that specify a school’s obligations are collected in 34 C.F.R. Part 106, which addresses issues like notice of nondiscrimination, the role of the Title IX Coordinator, recordkeeping, retaliation, and grievance procedures for sex discrimination. At Stanford, those federal duties are implemented by the university’s Title IX administrators within the SHARE Title IX and Title VI Office. 

California’s overlay: SB 493 and affirmative consent

California law adds important features that you should not overlook. SB 493, codified in part at California Education Code section 66281.8, requires California colleges to publish prompt and equitable grievance procedures, to use the preponderance standard, to prohibit repetitive or harassing questions, and to allow appeals when an institution offers an appeals process. The statute also interacts with California’s affirmative consent requirement in Education Code section 67386, often called “Yes Means Yes”. Under California’s standard, consent must be affirmative, conscious, and voluntary, and it must continue throughout sexual activity. Lack of protest or silence does not equal consent, and consent can be revoked at any time.

Stanford policies and definitions you will see

The SHARE Title IX and Title VI Office is Stanford’s central resource for addressing sexual harassment and prohibited sexual conduct, and its site collects the governing policies and procedures for students and employees. Stanford’s Administrative Guide and policy memos define terms like sexual misconduct, sexual assault, relationship violence, stalking, and consent. Stanford also uses an affirmative consent standard that places responsibility on each person to ensure they have the other person’s consent before engaging in sexual activity. These institutional definitions guide investigators, decision-makers, and hearing officers when they evaluate evidence in your case. 

What to expect from Stanford’s process

Intake, reporting, and supportive measures

A Title IX matter often begins with a report to the SHARE office or to other officials who must route the information to the Title IX Coordinator. Both complainants and respondents can request supportive measures that are designed to restore or preserve equal access to education without unreasonably burdening the other party. Typical measures include academic accommodations, housing adjustments, no-contact directives, and schedule modifications. Supportive measures are available regardless of whether a formal complaint is filed.

The investigation and your evidence

If a formal complaint is filed and the allegations fall within the university’s jurisdiction, Stanford initiates an investigation. Expect an investigator to collect statements, messages, photos, medical records where appropriate, door logs, and witness accounts. You will have opportunities to identify witnesses and submit documents. In California, institutions must ensure a process that is prompt and equitable, that uses a preponderance standard, and that allows parties to access and respond to relevant evidence. Getting your record in early matters. We help organize communications that show the presence or absence of affirmative consent, prior and subsequent messages about the encounter, and contextual details that speak to credibility and reliability. 

Hearings, questioning, and credibility

California law and California case precedent have shaped how hearings work when credibility is central and serious sanctions are on the table. Institutions must provide a hearing that allows for questioning, although direct cross-examination by a party’s advisor is not required under SB 493. Stanford’s decision-makers assess credibility by looking at consistency across statements, details in contemporaneous messages, witness accounts, and the presence or absence of sensory details that tend to corroborate a version of events. We prepare clients to answer questions about alcohol or drug use, memory gaps, and the sequence of consent communications around sexual contact. 

Possible outcomes and appeals

Sanctions can include educational requirements, probation, removal from housing, suspension, or expulsion for students, along with remedial actions for complainants. California’s SB 493 requires that if an institution provides an appeals process, it must be available to either party on equal terms, with defined bases such as conflict of interest, procedural error, or new evidence, and both sides must have an opportunity to respond. Appeals are often deadline-driven and can turn on narrow procedural points. We draft targeted appeals that focus on specific record citations, credibility determinations, and remedy adequacy. 

Practical steps to protect yourself now

Small choices early in a case can pay off later. Consider the following:

• Preserve messages, photos, and any digital evidence that may show context, history, timeline and consent.
  
• Consider writing a detailed chronology while events are fresh, including who said what and when, and how the encounter began and ended.
  
• Limit social media commentary and avoid discussing the case with classmates who may become witnesses.
  
• Ask for supportive measures that reduce friction, including a no-contact directive or academic accommodations.
  
• Identify witnesses who can corroborate and confirm both sides of the Title IX allegation.

These steps help both complainants and respondents. They keep the focus on the facts and reduce noise that can undermine credibility.

Common pitfalls in Stanford Title IX matters

One common mistake is assuming that a prior dating relationship proves consent for later sexual contact. Under California’s affirmative consent standard, prior intimacy does not substitute for consent on a new occasion. Consent must be affirmative, conscious, and voluntary each time, and it can be withdrawn at any point. Another misstep is waiting to request supportive measures. If you are a complainant who is struggling to access classes or labs, or a respondent who is experiencing escalating conflict because you and the other party share a course or residence, you can and should ask for adjustments as soon as possible.

A third pitfall is ignoring record-keeping. Credibility often turns on timestamped messages, saved drafts, or metadata. We help clients collect and present records in ways that decision-makers can follow. 

How Saland Law adds value in a Stanford case

Every case is different. Some center on a single disputed encounter. Others involve months of messages, a long-term relationship, or multiple witnesses who remember events differently. We begin by listening. We learn your goals, whether that is resolution without a hearing, a full hearing with live questioning, an appeal to correct a procedural error, or an outcome that restores your access to campus and your academic momentum. From there, we design a plan that fits Stanford’s procedures and timelines.

Our team prepares clients intensively for interviews and hearings. We test your account against likely questions you will face and rehearse how to stay grounded when asked about sensitive topics like alcohol use, sexual history, or mental health. For complainants, we focus on safety planning, documentation, and clarity about the remedies you need to access education. For respondents, we develop evidence that addresses affirmative consent and the meaning of your communications before, during, and after the encounter, along with information that speaks to intent, perception, and misinterpretation. We also coordinate with criminal counsel when needed to protect you from avoidable exposure.

Speak with a Stanford University Title IX Advisor

If your Stanford case involves allegations of sexual assault, dating violence, stalking, sexual contact without consent, or other prohibited conduct, our team is ready to help. We work with both respondents and complainants, and we understand how to present evidence, protect your rights, and navigate the SHARE process in concert with California law and the current federal environment. Saland Law assists students and families across the country. Contact us to discuss your goals, your timeline, and the strategy that best fits your case so you can move forward with clarity and confidence.