Institutional Sexual Assault Claims in Michigan: Understanding Your Rights Under Title IX, Section 1983, and ELCRA

Sexual assault within an institutional setting—a school, university, workplace, religious organization, medical provider, group home, or other structured entity—raises legal issues far beyond the criminal act itself. These cases focus on the institution’s failures: failures to supervise, failures to respond to reports, failures to maintain safe environments, and failures to follow mandatory procedures designed to protect vulnerable individuals.

Survivors in these environments have multiple civil pathways for justice. This guide outlines the key rights available under Title IX, Section 1983, and Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA)—with an emphasis on confidentiality, dignity, and institutional accountability.

Title IX and Institutional Liability — With Limits After Cummings

Title IX requires educational institutions that receive federal funds to address sexual harassment and sexual assault promptly, effectively, and without retaliation. When schools or universities fail to act, they may be liable for:

Deliberate indifference
Inadequate training or supervision
Ignoring prior reports
Failing to follow mandated grievance procedures
Creating or tolerating hostile environments

**But the Supreme Court’s decision in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller changed a critical part of Title IX remedies.**

**What Cummings Held — Short Case Summary**

Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, PLLC, 596 U.S. 212 (2022)

In Cummings, the Supreme Court held that emotional-distress damages are NOT recoverable under Spending Clause statutes unless those damages were traditionally available in breach-of-contract actions.

Title IX is a Spending Clause statute.
Result:

Survivors can no longer recover emotional-distress damages in a private Title IX lawsuit.

This dramatically narrows available remedies under Title IX and has reshaped litigation strategy nationwide.

What Title IX still provides

Title IX still allows:

Institutional accountability
Policy-based claims
Declaratory and injunctive relief
Claims for economic damages caused by institutional failures
Claims based on deliberate indifference
Retaliation claims

But for full civil recovery, survivors often need additional pathways beyond Title IX.

Section 1983 Claims Still Allow Broader Damages

While Cummings limits Title IX remedies, it does not affect claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Section 1983 allows survivors in public institutional settings to pursue constitutional claims, including:

Equal Protection violations
Due Process failures to protect
Unconstitutional policies, customs, or practices
Deliberate indifference by public employees or officials

Crucially: Emotional-distress damages are still recoverable under Section 1983.

That makes Section 1983 indispensable for survivors harmed in:

Public schools
Public universities
State-run facilities
Municipal or governmental institutions
State-affiliated programs

These claims remain a cornerstone of institutional-liability litigation after Cummings.

State Civil Rights Protections Under ELCRA

Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA) provides additional protection in institutional environments, especially regarding:

Educational settings
Workplace harassment
Public accommodations
Organizational programs and activities

ELCRA prohibits sex-based discrimination and sexual harassment, including institutional conduct that:

Ignored prior complaints
Allowed a hostile environment
Retaliated against reporting
Failed to maintain proper safeguards
Violated duties to protect students, staff, or program participants

Unlike Title IX, ELCRA still allows emotional-distress damages.

This makes ELCRA a critical avenue for Michigan survivors in institutional settings.

How Institutional Assault Claims Differ From Other Cases

Institutional sexual assault cases involve layered failures, such as:

Lack of proper background checks
Inadequate staff training
Inappropriate relationships ignored by supervisors
Repeated reports not investigated
Policy violations
Retaliation against survivors
Failures to protect minors or vulnerable adults
Systemic or cultural tolerance of misconduct

The primary focus is on what the institution did or failed to do, not the isolated conduct of a private individual.

These cases demand:

Confidential handling
Trauma-informed communication
Careful protection of identity
Strategic reporting
Precise evaluation of federal and state remedies
Discreet coordination with investigators or administrators

Confidentiality and Sensitive Case Management

Survivors in institutional settings often face fears of:

Public exposure
Academic or career consequences
Retaliation by staff
Treatment by peers or coworkers
Loss of opportunities
Stigma or re-traumatization

A trauma-informed legal approach focuses on:

Privacy
Respect
Controlled disclosure
Secure communication
Protective strategies during investigations
Careful management of public records

The goal is accountability without sacrificing survivor dignity.

Pathways to Accountability

Survivors harmed within institutional environments may pursue claims under:

Title IX
Section 1983
ELCRA
Negligent hiring, supervision, or retention theories
Failure-to-protect statutes
Policy and procedure violations
Institutional liability doctrines

Each path serves a different purpose.
The right combination depends on the type of institution, its funding, its policies, and the status of its employees.

If You Experienced Sexual Assault in an Institutional Setting

Survivors deserve clarity, privacy, and advocacy focused on institutional accountability, not private disputes.

If the misconduct occurred in a school, university, workplace, government facility, medical environment, or another organizational setting, you do not have to navigate these complex laws alone.