Off-Campus Conduct and Title IX Jurisdiction

The "Education Program or Activity" Standard

Section summaryTitle IX applies to conduct in the school's "education program or activity." The regulatory definition turns on substantial control — over the location, the event, the respondent, or the platform where the conduct occurred.

The statutory language is narrower than people assume. Title IX does not give the school plenary authority over student conduct anywhere it occurs. Under Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629 (1999), the underlying liability standard requires that the school have substantial control over both the harasser and the context in which the conduct occurred.

Two-prong substantial-control test:

• The school exercises substantial control over the respondent (typically met when the respondent is a student or employee).
• The school exercises substantial control over the context — the location, the event, the platform, or the program.

Both prongs have to hold. If the school does not control the context, the jurisdictional foundation collapses.

Study Abroad and Travel Programs

Section summaryStudy-abroad and school-sponsored travel programs fall squarely inside Title IX jurisdiction. The school controls the program, sets the rules, and is responsible for safety — all factors that satisfy the substantial-control test.

Even though the geographic location is overseas, the school's program is the relevant frame. The 2024 rule clarified that schools must respond to Title IX reports arising from study-abroad programs they sponsor.

Practical implications:

• Conduct on the program is treated like on-campus conduct for jurisdictional purposes.
• Local foreign law may also apply — but it does not displace Title IX.
• Investigation logistics are harder (time zones, witness availability, evidence collection), but the school is still required to provide a prompt and equitable resolution.

If a parallel criminal investigation is also a concern, the Texas statute of limitations checker may help map relevant criminal exposure on the U.S. side.

Off-Campus Housing

Section summaryOff-campus housing falls inside Title IX when the school exercises substantial control — typically through ownership, recognition, or affiliation. Privately leased apartments unaffiliated with the school usually do not.

Three common scenarios and how they typically fall:

• School-owned off-campus housing: inside Title IX.
• Greek-letter housing recognized by the school: typically inside Title IX, depending on the recognition agreement.
• Private apartment leased independently by students: typically outside Title IX unless connected to a school event or activity.

The fact-specific question is always how much control the school exercises. Recognition, registration, rule-setting, and supervision all push toward jurisdiction. A purely private lease typically does not.

Online and Social Media Conduct

Section summaryOnline conduct falls inside Title IX when it occurs on a school-controlled platform or when it directly affects access to the school's program. Conduct on purely private platforms is harder to reach.

The substantial-control test applies to online platforms the same way it applies to physical locations. The platform analysis usually asks:

• Did the school provide or operate the platform (Canvas, school email, school-managed Slack or Teams)?
• Was the platform used for a school activity?
• Did the conduct deprive the complainant of access to the school's program?

The Sixth Circuit's reasoning in Doe v. Baum, 903 F.3d 575 (6th Cir. 2018) — though primarily about hearing process — has informed how courts think about the connection between off-campus conduct and the educational environment. Conduct on a fully private platform with no connection to the school program is typically outside Title IX, even when it is offensive.

Jurisdictional Defense Strategy

Section summaryJurisdictional challenges are sometimes the strongest defense in off-campus cases. They go to the school's authority to investigate at all and can result in dismissal before the live hearing.

How the defense raises jurisdiction:

• Move for dismissal early — typically after the notice of allegations and before investigation completes.
• Build the factual record on the school's lack of substantial control over the context.
• Distinguish between conduct that arises in a school context and conduct that merely involves students.
• Preserve the jurisdictional argument for appeal even if the initial motion is denied.

For the related question of when conduct between students rises to actionable harassment at all, see Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, 524 U.S. 274 (1998). For the procedural framework once jurisdiction is established, the pillar Title IX defense guide walks through the full process. Run hearing logistics through the hearing prep tool well before the date.

Frequently Asked Questions

Next Steps

If you are facing a situation described here, consult counsel promptly. Many issues in this area run on strict deadlines.

• Call (972) 370-5060
• Email info@landllawgroup.com