More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

In this episode of More Likely Than Not, Kayleigh and Joe welcome Dr. Mikiba Morehead of TNG Consulting, and Adam Dodge, J.D., founder of endtab.org, an organization dedicated to ending technology-facilitated abuse. Together, they explore the rapidly evolving landscape of sexual misconduct in online spaces, from non-consensual intimate image (NCII) sharing and sextortion to AI-generated “undressing” apps and synthetic nudes.

They underscore a critical point: the harm is real, even when the images are not.

Though the tools have changed, the behaviors of coercion, humiliation, stalking, harassment, and abuse persist. Adam and Mikiba examine Title IX implications, jurisdiction challenges when conduct occurs off campus or on personal devices, and how to evaluate escalation in digital contexts. They also share practical prevention strategies centered on bodily autonomy, digital consent, and institutional preparedness, reminding practitioners that you do not need to be a tech expert to respond effectively.

If you have ever wondered whether you are overreacting or not reacting quickly enough, we are more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

Winter temperatures and news headlines set the tone as Kayleigh and Joe discuss current events affecting K-12 and higher education, with a familiar sense that chaos and uncertainty may be sticking around for a few more weeks this season.

They also dig into a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report examining the financial impact of the Department of Education’s efforts to reduce staffing at the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), along with recent developments in DEI program litigation and the Trump administration’s ongoing, high-profile conflict with Harvard University.

Kayleigh and Joe break down two recent appellate court decisions with potential implications for practitioners, including a First Circuit case examining what constitutes “actual knowledge” under Title IX in a K-12 setting and a Fourth Circuit case addressing First Amendment and religious accommodation challenges related to pronoun and gender identity policies in schools.

On Overheard on the Listserv, they discuss the risks and requirements of practitioners possessing explicit material, particularly when minors may be involved, and practical ways to manage evidence while minimizing exposure and unintended consequences, including the use of written descriptions and tightly controlled access.

If you’ve ever read a listserv question and thought, “I really hope this never happens to me,” we’re more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

In this episode of More Likely Than Not, hosts Kayleigh and Joe break down recent U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., two cases challenging state laws that restrict transgender girls from participating in girls’ and women’s athletics across both higher education and K-12 settings.

TNG Consulting colleagues Kim Pacelli, J.D., M.Ed., and Dan Fotoples, J.D., M.A., join the team to talk through the high-level legal questions at the center of both cases, including an Equal Protection Clause analysis and the “what level of scrutiny applies” debate. For B.P.J., they also explore the additional question of how Title IX athletics regulations may factor into the Court’s approach.

Oral arguments generate headlines, speculation, and anxiety, but they rarely provide reliable answers about what the Court will ultimately do. The attorneys and even several justices appear to be signaling interest in a narrow ruling, and the safest move for practitioners is to stay steady, stay informed, and avoid reacting to guesses disguised as certainty.

If you’re looking for clarity while waiting for the Court’s decision, we’re more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.