Olaoluwa Faparusi v. Case Western Reserve University, et al.

Whether CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY's use of the preponderance of evidence standard in the sexual misconduct hearing that found the Petitioner liable comprised state action, to establish a right to recover under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as articulated by this Court's decision in Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991 (1982), in that the mandate by the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) 2011 Title IX guidance ("the Dear Colleague Letter"), that schools must use the lowest burden of proof in sexual harassment and sexual assault adjudications, as a condition of receiving federal funding, and the subsequent threat by the OCR that schools that were not in compliance would lose all their federal funding, was the State's exercise of coercive power such that the choice of law must be deemed that of the State? Whether CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY's use of the preponderance of evidence standard in its sexual misconduct hearing that found the Petitioner liable comprised state action, to establish a right to recover under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as articulated by this Court's decisions in Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922 (1982), and Brentwood Acad. v. Tenn. Secondary Sch. Athletic Assn, 531 U.S. 288 (2001), in that the OCR's 2011 Title IX guidance mandated that schools must use the lowest burden of proof in sexual harassment and sexual