Hiding Behind the Watchman: School Boards Circumvent the System Foregoing Liability and Responsibility for Notice Under Title IX

I. INTRODUCTION
In Medieval Times, there were Castles surrounded by an outer wall separated from the rest of society by a moat with a bridge that only allowed the selected few to enter. The Castle and its occupants were considered a "walled city" that kept to itself and was virtually impenetrable. Hundreds of years later a medieval system still exists, yet not in the form of a Castle and its royal occupants but rather in the form of the School Board and its members. And like the watchmen making sure nobody bothered the fort, superintendents are left to act as buffers to any threat or liability the School Board encounters. However, when trouble arises, these superintendents and other officials of the public institution are merely seen as messengers by the school board rather than the true authoritative figures in the chain of command that they really encompass.

Such were the circumstances in Rasnick v. Dickenson County Sch. Bd. The decision in Rasnick held that under Title IX , the fact that the Superintendent did not have the authority to remedy the sexual harassment suffered by students in prior cases was a defense to the blatant ignorance of the abuse that occurred as a result of the previous events.

Title IX enforces gender equality and prohibits sex discrimination in any program or activity that receives federal financial assistance. At inception, its main objective was to protect federal resources from being used to support discriminatory practices in education programs and also to provide protection to individual citizens against those practices. Thus, individuals could not be sued under Title IX, but rather educational institutions would be held responsible for discriminatory practices.