University of Michigan Title IX Lawyer

A Title IX matter at the University of Michigan can upend a student’s education, and life well beyond the boundaries of the school, in a matter of days. For some students, the first sign of trouble is an email directing them not to contact someone like a Title IX Coordinator, not to enter parts of campus, or to attend an initial meeting about alleged misconduct. For others, the process begins after they report sexual assault, dating violence, stalking, or nonconsensual sexual contact and then realize that the university’s response will require detailed statements, evidence review, and a structured resolution path. Either way, the experience can, and routinely will, feel intensely personal and frightening while also being distinctly procedural. Deadlines arrive quickly. Assumptions harden early. “Homework” needs to be done identifying, preserving, and collecting evidence. All of this can lead to a situation where the record being created follows a student long after the campus process ends.

The University of Michigan is not a small campus with an informal disciplinary culture. It is a large, globally visible institution with a broad residential footprint, highly competitive academic programs, significant graduate and professional populations, and a complex administrative structure. On the Ann Arbor campus alone, the university reported a Fall 2024 headcount of 52,855 students, including 34,454 undergraduates and 15,688 graduate students. With a community of that size, it is unsurprising that the university’s reporting landscape includes recurring concerns involving stalking, intimate partner violence, and sex-based misconduct, alongside a robust set of offices and policies designed to address those concerns.

Saland Law represents students and families in Title IX and university disciplinary matters nationwide. The firm is led by Jeremy Saland, a Title IX attorney-advisor, criminal defense lawyer, and former Manhattan prosecutor who brings both a collegiate based and courtroom-tested approach to high-stakes fact development, credibility testing, and strategic advocacy. Saland Law advises both respondents and complainants because effective advocacy depends on understanding how these cases develop from every angle, including how reports are assessed, how supportive measures are implemented, how hearings are structured, and how credibility determinations are actually made. Equally important, Saland Law’s proven approach is founded in identifying the evidence needed to Although headquartered in New York City, Saland Law can assist University of Michigan students wherever they are located, including those who return home during the process or who face parallel concerns in multiple jurisdictions.

Why University of Michigan Title IX Matters Demand a Campus-Specific Strategy

Title IX cases do not unfold in a vacuum. They unfold in a living campus environment where housing, academics, employment, research obligations, and social networks overlap. At Michigan, that overlap can be especially intense. Students may share residence halls, labs, clinical settings, athletic spaces, student organizations, or graduate programs. A single allegation can trigger immediate supportive measures that alter class schedules, building access, or daily routines. These measures may be appropriate and necessary, but they can also create pressure points that influence how parties respond and what evidence is preserved.

Michigan’s community is also broad in ways that matter for Title IX strategy. Many students are far from home. Others are professional or graduate students whose degree paths depend on lab work, advising relationships, clinical placements, or externally funded research. A Title IX process can jeopardize not just enrollment, but also grants, professional placements, and long-term licensing or employment goals. That reality changes how a case should be approached. A careful strategy considers the immediate procedural steps while also protecting the longer arc of a student’s record, reputation, and future options.

Understanding the Governing Law Behind a Michigan Title IX Case

Title IX is a federal civil rights law that prohibits sex discrimination in education programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance. The statute is codified at 20 U.S.C. § 1681. Federal regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Education implement Title IX in higher education and are found at 34 C.F.R. Part 106. 

In practice, Title IX compliance is intertwined with additional federal frameworks that shape how universities define and respond to sexual violence, dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking. The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, commonly called the Clery Act, imposes reporting and policy obligations, and it is codified at 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f). The Violence Against Women Act and related amendments influence campus obligations around prevention, procedural fairness, and definitions used in campus safety reporting. Michigan’s Annual Security and Fire Safety Report reflects these overlapping obligations and includes Clery crime statistics for the prior three calendar years, including stalking, domestic violence, and dating violence. 

A well-built Title IX strategy starts with this legal architecture. It recognizes that the university must follow mandated process requirements, but it also recognizes that institutions still exercise discretion in how they implement those requirements through campus policies, investigative practices, and hearing protocols. The difference between what is “allowed” and what is “fair and accurate” is often where advocacy matters most.

What University of Michigan Data Suggests About Risk, Reporting, and Campus Reality

Many students and families approach Title IX cases as if they are rare events. University reporting and survey efforts suggest a different picture. Michigan’s 2024 Campus Climate Survey Related to Sex and Gender provides a window into prevalence and perceptions on the Ann Arbor campus and beyond. In the Ann Arbor student sample, the executive summary reported incidence rates since the beginning of the academic year for categories including stalking, intimate partner violence, sexual violence, and sexual or gender-based harassment. For example, the executive summary reported stalking incidence rates of 26% for undergraduate women and 19% for undergraduate men in that survey framework, along with intimate partner violence and sexual violence incidence rates that varied by group.The same executive summary also reported that majorities of students expressed understanding of consent-related statements, including agreement that consent must be given at each step in a sexual encounter. 

Separately, the university’s Annual Security and Fire Safety Report provides Clery statistics that reflect reported offenses in defined geographic categories. In the 2024 report, the Clery statistics table listed stalking totals for 2023, 2022, and 2021, along with reported domestic violence and dating violence figures for those years. These numbers do not “prove” any particular case, and they do not capture confidential disclosures that never become formal reports, but they do confirm an important point. These issues are not hypothetical on a major campus. They are recurring realities, and both complainants and respondents can find themselves navigating an institutional system that is built to move forward even when the underlying facts are contested.

Consent, Capacity, and the Practical Meaning of Affirmative Consent at Michigan

The phrase “affirmative consent” is often used casually, but in a Title IX case it becomes a high-stakes concept shaped by policy definitions, context, and evidence. Many University of Michigan cases hinge on a small set of recurring questions. Did consent exist at the time of each sexual contact? Did either person have the capacity to consent? Was intoxication present, and if so, how did it affect memory, perception, and decision-making? Was there a power imbalance, such as a supervisory relationship, student employee context, or research environment dynamic?

It is common for parties to describe the same night in sharply different ways. One student may view the interaction as mutual and ongoing, while another may describe pressure, confusion, fear, or incapacitation. In cases involving alcohol, students sometimes assume that intoxication creates an automatic outcome. The reality is more complicated. Universities typically analyze capacity and voluntariness through a fact-intensive lens that includes the timeline of drinking, observed behavior, witness accounts, and contemporaneous communications. A credibility assessment may turn on whether a narrative accounts for details that can be corroborated, whether it is consistent over time, involves witnesses to or immediately before or after an alleged incident, is supported by historical evidence and witnesses, and whether it aligns with objective evidence such as texts, photos, rideshare logs, access records, or video.

Michigan’s climate survey executive summary suggests that many students understand consent principles in the abstract, but Title IX cases arise because real situations do not always match the simplicity of a training module. That gap between principle and lived reality is exactly why careful preparation matters. A respondent needs a disciplined, evidence-grounded narrative that addresses the specific policy elements at issue, not a broad denial. A complainant needs a clear account that explains context, impact, and corroboration opportunities, not just conclusions. In both cases, the goal is to ensure that the record reflects the facts as accurately and completely as possible.

The University Process: Reporting, Supportive Measures, and Early Decision Points

At many universities, including Michigan, the earliest stage is often the most consequential. Supportive measures can be offered regardless of whether a formal complaint is filed, and they can include academic accommodations, housing adjustments, changes in work assignments, schedule modifications, or no-contact directives. The university’s reporting and resource pages describe reporting pathways and note that the Equity, Civil Rights, and Title IX Office oversees reports of sexual or gender-based misconduct. 

From an advocacy standpoint, early choices matter because they shape the evidence record and the narrative frame. A student who responds impulsively to outreach from administrators may inadvertently create inconsistencies. A student who delays gathering communications, witness information, or timeline details may lose access to evidence that disappears quickly. Even well-meaning students can make mistakes by assuming that a short explanatory email will “clear things up,” or by trying to negotiate informally with the other party in a way that later looks like pressure or retaliation.

A careful approach also accounts for the fact that campus and criminal processes can overlap. Michigan’s Annual Security and Fire Safety Report describes the existence of a Special Victims Unit within campus policing and emphasizes trauma-informed response and options. When allegations involve potential crimes such as sexual assault, dating violence, or stalking, statements made in one setting can affect the other. Strategic guidance should consider whether law enforcement is involved, whether a protective order is being pursued, and how to avoid self-inflicted harm through inconsistent or premature statements.

Representation for Respondents: Building a Record That Can Withstand Scrutiny

A respondent is not just defending reputation. They may be defending housing, enrollment, scholarships, program standing, future admissions, and career options. Let’s rephrase that: a respondent is fighting to preserve all of that in the face of potentially overwhelming bias by a university that will undoubtedly never admit it. Effective representation by not merely an advisor but an attorney trained advisor, begins with slowing the process down mentally, even if the university timeline is moving fast. The aim is to respond deliberately, not reactively.

Respondent advocacy often includes a close reading of the allegations, mapping them to policy elements, and identifying what evidence can confirm or contradict each claim. It includes preparing for interviews so that answers are complete, consistent, and aligned with objective proof. It also includes anticipating how decision-makers tend to assess credibility, especially when there are memory gaps, intoxication claims, or evolving social relationships.

In many cases, the most important work is not a dramatic hearing moment. It is the disciplined development of the written record. Investigative summaries, interview notes, text messages, and witness statements become the foundation on which later findings rest. Once a flawed record exists, correcting it is often difficult. A respondent needs help ensuring that key context is included early, that corroboration is identified, and that the process is monitored for fairness.

Representation for Complainants: Clarity, Support, and Accountability Without Losing Control

For complainants, the university process can feel like being asked to translate a painful experience into a structured administrative format. Reporting sexual assault, dating violence, stalking, or nonconsensual sexual contact may require recounting intimate details, providing documentation, and responding to credibility challenges. Many complainants also face practical concerns such as seeing the respondent in class, living in the same building, or fearing retaliation through rumors or social pressure.

Effective representation supports complainants by helping them present their account clearly, preserve evidence, and request supportive measures tailored to real daily needs. It can also help complainants understand procedural options, including whether to pursue an investigation, whether informal or alternative resolution options exist, and how hearings or questioning rules may work. Just as importantly, careful guidance can reduce the likelihood that the process becomes needlessly retraumatizing through poorly framed questions, unnecessary invasions of privacy, or administrative missteps.

Evidence That Matters in Michigan Title IX Cases

Evidence in Title IX matters is often more extensive than students expect, and it is frequently digital. Messages, social media interactions, call logs, photos, location data, access records, and third-party communications can become central. Witnesses matter, but not all witnesses are equally useful. The most persuasive witnesses are often those who can confirm timeline details, observed behavior, or contemporaneous statements rather than those who simply testify to character.

Students should also understand the difference between relevance and volume. Dumping a large number of screenshots without context can backfire. The university’s decision-makers are not a jury, and they often rely on summaries. Effective advocacy organizes evidence into a clear narrative structure that explains why each item matters and what it proves.

How Saland Law Approaches University of Michigan Title IX Matters

Saland Law approaches campus cases with the seriousness of litigation, even though the forum is administrative. The firm focuses on early planning, careful record-building, and strategic communication. Jeremy Saland’s background as a criminal lawyer and former Manhattan prosecutor informs a method that is attentive to evidentiary detail, timeline integrity, and credibility testing. Saland Law also understands the human dimension of these cases. Students are often navigating fear, shame, anger, confusion, and pressure from peers and family at the same time they are expected to perform academically and meet procedural deadlines.

Because Michigan is a large institution with multiple campuses and a complex compliance infrastructure, effective advocacy also requires understanding how university systems function in practice, including supportive measure implementation, coordination with academic units, and the ways Clery and Title IX obligations can influence administrative decision-making. For reference, Michigan’s public-facing reporting and resource materials describe reporting pathways and emphasize the role of the Equity, Civil Rights, and Title IX Office in overseeing reports.

Get Experienced Guidance for a University of Michigan Title IX Matter

If you are a University of Michigan student facing a Title IX investigation, hearing, or related disciplinary process, do not assume the university will “sort it out” without consequences. Whether the allegation involves sexual assault, dating violence, stalking, sexual contact, or disputes about affirmative consent, the outcome can affect your education, your record, and your future opportunities. If you are accused of wrongdoing as a respondent and you are found responsible for any violation, know that “can affect” will transform into “will gravely affect” your future at the university and well beyond.

Saland Law represents both respondents and complainants nationwide and can help you approach the process with clarity, strategy, and careful procedural protection. To speak confidentially with a Title IX lawyer about a University of Michigan matter, contact Saland Law to schedule a consultation.