CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
JOHN DOE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
OBERLIN COLLEGE,
Defendant-Appellee.
   No. 19-3342
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland.
No. 1:17-cv-01335—Solomon Oliver, Jr., District Judge.
Argued: December 12, 2019
Decided and Filed: June 29, 2020
Before: GILMAN, KETHLEDGE, and READLER, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. Any number of federal constitutional and statutory provisions reflect the proposition that, in this country, we determine guilt or innocence individually—rather than collectively, based on one’s identification with some demographic group. That principle has not always been perfectly realized in our Nation’s history, but as judges it is one that we take an oath to enforce. Here, the relevant statute is Title IX of the Higher Education Act of 1965, which bars universities that receive federal funds from discriminating against students based on their sex. John Doe argues that his complaint in this case adequately stated a claim that Oberlin College did precisely that when it determined his responsibility on a sexual-assault allegation. We agree, and reverse the district court’s decision to the contrary.