Image by Getty Images

By Maia Efrem March 14, 2016

A Manhattan judge dismissed a lawsuit that accused Columbia University of a Title IX violation on the grounds that it mishandled the actions of student Emma Sulkowicz, who carried a mattress around campus to protest an alleged rape.

Sulkowicz’s alleged rapist, Paul Nungesser, had accused the university of causing him emotional distress and violating his rights under Title IX, which in any educational program of federally funded activity from being “excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination on the basis of sex,” according to the Gothamist.

“Nungesser’s argument rests on a logical fallacy,” wrote Judge Gregory Woods. “He assumes that because the allegations against him concerned a sexual act that everything that follows from it is ‘sex-based’ within the meaning of Title IX. He is wrong. Taken to its logical extreme, Nungesser’s position would lead to the conclusion that those who commit, or are accused of committing, sexual assault are a protected class under Title IX.”

Forwarding the News

Thoughtful, balanced reporting from the Forward and around the web, bringing you updated news and analysis each day.

Terms(Required)

I agree to the Forward's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Email(Required)

Sulkowicz built her senior thesis project, “Carry That Weight,” around her protest of the Columbia administration’s reaction to her allegation against Nungesser. Sulkowicz even walked across the graduation stage with the mattress, with some help from fellow students. After two additional students accused him of rape, Nungesser sued the school in April 2015.

Woods said there was no real evidence to support Nungesser’s claim that Sulcowicz’s mattress project inhibited him from attending campus career events, “Aside from the fact that it is debatable whether such events are an educational opportunity…there are no facts supporting this bare assertion—did he even attempt to attend these events? How many events were there? Was he turned away at the door?”

According to the Gothamist, Nungesser has 30 days to file an amended complaint. His attorney told Reuters “While we’re disappointed with the judge’s ruling today, we believe that this is a very strong case and we will continue in our pursuit of justice for Mr. Nungesser.”

The Forward is free to read, but it isn’t free to produce

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward.

Now more than ever, American Jews need independent news they can trust, with reporting driven by truth, not ideology. We serve you, not any ideological agenda.

At a time when other newsrooms are closing or cutting back, the Forward has removed its paywall and invested additional resources to report on the ground from Israel and around the U.S. on the impact of the war, rising antisemitism and polarized discourse.

Readers like you make it all possible. Support our work by becoming a Forward Member and connect with our journalism and your community.

This is a great time to support independent Jewish journalism you rely on. Make a gift today!

—  Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

Support our mission to tell the Jewish story fully and fairly.

$90 $180

$360

Other amount