Title VI & Title VII Hostile Environment Harassment FAQ

This FAQ is designed to answer common questions about how the University responds to reports of discrimination and harassment under Title VI and Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as applicable state laws.

What is Title VI?

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color and national origin, including shared ancestry discrimination and harassment, in programs or activities undertaken by entities that receive federal financial assistance. As a recipient of federal funds, and consistent with the University’s values of creating a welcoming environment for all students, the University complies with Title VI. 

The University will meet its Title VI obligation by (1) responding to reports alleging violations of the University’s Prohibited Discrimination and Retaliation policy; (2) formally investigating allegations of misconduct where there is an identifiable respondent; and (3) treating applicants, students, and employees equitably without regard to protected characteristics. 

What is Title VII?

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. The University’s response to Title VII reports is similar to the response to Title VI reports as described above.  

How does the University Comply with Title VI and Title VII?

Under Title VI, the University will assess whether a hostile environment was created. In determining whether a hostile environment has been created under Title VI, the University will consider:

• Whether the Whether individuals associated with the institution were subject to severe or pervasive harassment that was motivated, at least in part, by race, color or national origin;
• Whether the University had actual knowledge of the harassment; and
• Whether the University had the ability to exercise substantial control over the harassers.

Does any UO policy protect campus community members on the basis of race, color, and national origin, including shared ancestry, from the conduct of other campus community members?

Yes. The UO’s Prohibited Discrimination and Retaliation Policy prohibits discrimination, harassment, and retaliation on the basis of actual or perceived race, color, and national origin, ancestry, and religion, as well as other protected characteristics including sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, family or marital status, citizenship, service in the uniformed services, veteran status, expunged juvenile record, and/or the use of leave protected by state or federal law. 

The University’s Prohibited Discrimination and Retaliation policy defines “harassment” as follows:

Unwelcome verbal or physical conduct based on a protected characteristic that is sufficiently severe or pervasive that it creates a hostile environment or substantially interferes with an individual’s employment, education or access to university programs, activities, or opportunities, and would have such an effect on a similarly situated reasonable person. Harassment may include, but is not limited to, verbal, online and electronic statements, electronic and online conduct, nonverbal or physical conduct, graphic or written statements, threats, or slurs, intentional or repeated deadnaming or misgendering.

Whether a hostile environment has been created or substantial interference has occurred is a fact-specific inquiry. Factors that may be considered include the nature, frequency, and duration of the conduct in question, the degree to which the conduct affects individuals’ access to university programs or activities, the location and context in which it occurs, and the status, ages, roles and prior interactions of the individuals involved. Hostile environment harassment includes when an individual engages in a pattern of conduct toward multiple people that would, in the aggregate, create a hostile environment for a reasonable person. It also includes when a hostile environment is created by the conduct of multiple people, acting in concert, toward an individual.

Protections under the policy include protection from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on characteristics and stereotypes associated with a protected characteristic, including racial stereotypes and stereotypes associated with a particular religion or national origin/ancestry. Discrimination and harassment based upon an association with others of a different actual or perceived race, color, or national origin, religion or ancestry is also prohibited.

A hostile environment based on race, color, national origin, religion or ancestry can be created by the actions of people of the same color and members of the same race, national origin, religion or ancestry as the impacted student or employee. 

Are all religions protected under UO’s policy?

Yes. All religions receive the same protection under UO policy, including but not limited to the following faiths: Aztec, Buddhism, Catholicism, Cherokee, Christianity, Confusianism, Coptic, Greek Orthodox, Hinduism, Hopi, Inuit, Islam, Jeungsanism, Judaism, Lakota, Protestantism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, Tenriism. People of all other religions and people who do not believe in or practice religion are also protected from discrimination and harassment under the policy. 

What is the definition of Islamophobia?

While there is not one universally accepted definition of the term “Islamophobia,” the term refers to fear of or hostility toward Islam and Muslims which may be expressed as dislike or hatred of individuals who are Muslim or perceived as Muslim, or countries where the predominant religion is Islam because they are Muslim countries. It includes hostility towards individuals because of their physical appearance, skin color, physical features, their country of origin, the language they speak, their clothing, or their names—whether they actively practice Islam or not. It can be used to justify hate crimes such as physical attacks, the destruction of property, the forced removal of religious attire, and attacks on community and religious institutions, as well as other forms of discrimination and harassment of individuals who are Muslim. This includes stereotyping of Muslims and the depiction of exaggerated physical features and mannerisms.  Islamophobia also includes using symbols and images associated with anti-Muslim tropes (e.g., claims that people of the Muslim faith are violent or terrorists). 

Reports of “Islamophobia” are reviewed as allegations of harassment based on religion, race, national origin, ancestry, and/or religion” and must meet the definition of “harassment” set forth in question 3 above in order for there to be a finding that a policy violation occurred.

What is the definition of anti-Semitism?

While there not one universally accepted definition of the term “anti-Semitism,” the term refers to a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as dislike or hatred toward Jewish individuals and/or their property, Jewish community institutions or religious facilities, or the state of Israel because it is a Jewish state. It can be used to justify hate crimes such as physical attacks, the destruction of property, and attacks on community and religious institutions, as well as discrimination and harassment of individuals who are Jewish or those associated with individuals who are Jewish. This includes, but is not limited to, stereotyping of Jews, blaming Jews for “why things go wrong,” and the depiction of exaggerated physical features and mannerisms. Anti-Semitism also includes using symbols and images associated with anti-Semitic tropes (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis, as well as holding Jews individually or collectively responsible for the actions of the state of Israel. 

Reports of “anti-Semitism” are reviewed as allegations of harassment based on religion, race, national origin, and/or ancestry,” and must meet the definition of “harassment” set forth in question 3 above in order for there to be a finding that a policy violation occurred. 

What are examples of discrimination and harassment based on ancestry, color, national origin, race and religion?

Violations depend on a totality of the circumstances taking into account the severity, pervasiveness, and/or directedness of the conduct. 

Below are examples of conduct that, if substantiated and upon considering the totality of the circumstances, would likely constitute discrimination or harassment based on race, color, religion or national origin, including shared ancestry:

• Refusing to hire an individual or demoting, reprimanding or terminating an individual because of their ancestry, color, national origin, race, or religion. 
• An identity-based requirement or expression of a particular belief as a pre-requisite to participation in any university property, program or activity. For example, denying students of a given faith entry into a university-affiliated event unless they disavow the actions of a government or group tied to their identity or express a particular belief.
• Refusing to consider or favoring a student for an academic award or scholarship because of the student’s ancestry, color, national origin, race, or religion.
• A Jewish student’s name plate is defaced with a swastika, or epithets referencing conspiracy theories about Jewish people are scrawled on the student’s door.
• A student demands that another student who wears a hijab remove the hijab. Or a student removes or attempts to remove a jijab worn by a student who is Muslim.
• Mocking or bullying someone because of their identity, their religious attire, their name, their hairstyle, the language they speak, their accent, their association with a religious organization or identity-related student club, or the removal of religious symbols such as a mezuza from a person’s doorway. 
• Students disregarding a peer’s contributions to a group project because of their ancestry, color, national origin, race or religion or because the peer speaks with an accent, or because their first language is not English.
• Upon hearing a language other than English, telling someone that “in America, we speak English!” or “Go home!” or words to similar effect.
• Expressing that someone is a criminal or likely to engage in criminal activity or be violent because of their national origin or ancestry or their religion, race or color.
• Surveilling an individual or reporting an individual due to their real or perceived race, color, religion, ancestry, or national origin for engaging in normal everyday activities, such as accessing public spaces, under the guise that they appear “suspicious” or “don’t appear to belong” or their presence makes others “feel unsafe or uncomfortable.”
• Calls for genocide of an entire people or group tied to a particular race, religion, ancestry or national origin. as well as calls for a group tied to a particular race, religion, ancestry or national origin to be removed from campus.
• Vandalizing the office doors of a student group’s office or those of a department tied to the study of a country, religion, or people because the office is tied to the study of a country, religion, or its people.
• Accusing someone or a group of people of being terrorists because of their national origin, ancestry, accent or the language they speak. 

How does harassment intersect with the First Amendment?

People have the right to express their opinions, including opinions that criticize individuals, organizations, and governments. These speech protections extend to speech that many might consider offensive, including indecent or hateful speech.

A single awkward, inappropriate or unwelcome verbal comment will not usually be deemed a policy violation. But more targeted speech, including a single targeted use of a slur may violate the policy. Other comments, even if only uttered once, may also constitute a policy violation, if sufficiently severe.

Context matters. For example, criticism of the conduct of a nation state, not the people of a nation state, in response to the decisions of a government would not violate the UO’s policy. However, criticism that is grounded in beliefs or perceptions of the primary religion practiced within a nation may violate UO policy if sufficiently severe or pervasive so as to interfere with access to university programs, activities and opportunities. In responding to all reports involving speech, the University is mindful that all individuals, including members of the campus community, have free speech rights. 

There may be times when the University initiates a formal investigation to gather evidence to determine whether the speech at issue may be protected. Where the speech is determined to be protected, a determination will be made that University policy was not violated. But even if the alleged conduct does not rise to the level of a policy violation, the University may still take non-disciplinary supportive or remedial measures to preserve equal access to the University’s programs or activities or to maintain a respectful workplace.  Supportive or remedial measures could include access to counseling or work modifications or academic support, making content neutral amendments to policies or procedures, requiring training, implementing safety measures, as well as other measures designed to address the impact of the speech. Where an incident impacts the broader campus community, the University may issue a public statement to convey its values or to condemn conduct.

To learn more about free expression, please visit Upholding Free Expression and Creating an Inclusive Camus Community, Free Speech and Demonstration Guidelines, Guidelines for Speaking Out at the University of Oregon, and Protesting Guidelines. The Guidelines include information about time, place, and manner restrictions, including related to campus protests, as well as information on how to reserve/schedule space. 

Will the University address online comments made by members of the campus community?

The University does not monitor the online activities of students or employees.  However, the University can and does at times take steps to address online comments made by members of the campus community if and when the online speech comes to the University’s attention. What can be done in response to a given report will depend on the content of the post/comment, who is alleged to have made the post/comment and to whom, and the context in which the post/comment was made.

While the University strives to maintain an environment free of discrimination and harassment, if a campus community member expresses disagreement with that value, without more, the individual who made the comment(s), cannot be disciplined by the University. Speech enjoys broad protections under the US and Oregon Constitutions. Opinions are generally protected by federal and state constitutions. 

Please note that due to their respective privacy policies, social media companies will not disclose the identity of an account holder to the University, nor will they take down posts at the University’s request. The University therefore requires reliable information that an online account belongs to the person accused of misconduct. 

Regardless of whether online content is actionable by the University, the University can take steps to remedy the impact of online comments and conduct but generally cannot require individuals, including those affiliated with the University, to remove posts from their personal social media pages, unless, as part of a formal process, it was determined that University resources were used in connection with the post.

Does student or employee participation in a protest violate UO policy?

Members of the campus community have the right to free expression and assembly, including the right to participate in demonstrations opposing a perceived wrong. So long as such participation takes place in a manner consistent with applicable University policies, there will be no finding that a policy was violated even where the protest is in support of a political perspective with which others disagree.  Protest Guidelines, Free Speech and Demonstration Guidelines, and Free Expression Guidelines are available on the UO website. The University does not have a single poster policy, meaning that different campus buildings may have different policies related to putting up posters. Individuals wishing to put up posters and signs should contact academic and administrative departments to ascertain policies within a given department or building. Departments with publicly posted policies include without limitation:

• EMU Advertising
• Housing
• UO Libraries

How will the University respond if someone’s expression of their beliefs or political views causes a student or employee to feel unwelcome on campus or even unsafe?

We encourage campus community members who feel impacted by the words or actions of others to contact OEOA at eoa@uoregon.edu, or another trusted campus resource for support. 

Even where an incident is not sufficiently severe or pervasive to have created a hostile environment or does not otherwise constitute a policy violation, the University will seek to provide supportive measures to impacted individuals. Examples of such remedies may include the initiation or continuation of supportive measures, modifications to academic, employment, or housing conditions or assignments. Supportive measures for impacted individuals may not adversely impact other individuals. In addition, remedial, non-disciplinary action may be taken where the alleged conduct does not constitute a policy violation, but additional incidents or escalation of conduct could give rise to a policy violation. The University may also take additional measures where there is a determination that a hostile environment has been created, even if the speech that created the hostile environment is protected speech. Please note that political affiliation is not a protected characteristic under state or federal law or university policy.