Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School Dist., 524 U.S. 274, 31 (1998)

Page:   Index   Previous  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  Next

304

GEBSER v. LAGO VISTA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST.

Stevens, J., dissenting

289. That fact did not affect the Court's analysis, much less persuade the Court that a damages remedy was unavailable. Cf. Cannon, 441 U. S., at 711 ("The fact that other provisions of a complex statutory scheme create express remedies has not been accepted as a sufficient reason for refusing to imply an otherwise appropriate remedy under a separate section").

The majority's inappropriate reliance on Title IX's administrative enforcement scheme to limit the availability of a damages remedy leads the Court to require not only actual knowledge on the part of "an official who at a minimum has authority to address the alleged discrimination and to institute corrective measures on the recipient's behalf," but also that official's "refus[al] to take action," or "deliberate indifference" toward the harassment. Ante, at 290.13 Presumably, few Title IX plaintiffs who have been victims of intentional discrimination will be able to recover damages under this exceedingly high standard. The Court fails to recognize that its holding will virtually "render inutile causes of action authorized by Congress through a decision that no remedy is available." Franklin, 503 U. S., at 74.

IV

We are not presented with any question concerning the affirmative defenses that might eliminate or mitigate the recovery of damages for a Title IX violation. It has been argued, for example, that a school district that has adopted and vigorously enforced a policy that is designed to prevent sexual harassment and redress the harms that such conduct may produce should be exonerated from damages liability.14

13 The only decisions the Court cites to support its adoption of such a stringent standard are cases arising under a quite different statute, 42 U. S. C. § 1983. See ante, at 291.

14 See Brief for National Education Association as Amicus Curiae 15 (proposing affirmative defense that "the entity had adopted and has implemented an effective prevention and compliance program").

Page:   Index   Previous  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007