Liberty University faces second lawsuit accusing it of mishandling sexual assault cases
In her suit against the private Christian university, Erika Woolfolk stated she was paid less, required to work more, and the subject of a hostile work environment while employed in the university's office of Equity and Compliance and Title IX.
Woolfolk's work involved investigating cases of sexual violence on campus, of which she alleged her bosses would improperly predetermine their outcomes, according to her lawsuit. She claimed in the filing that she shared that information and more about the university's 'systemic violations of federal law' with the U.S. Department of Education.
She also claims she was fired for it.
She is now the second former Liberty University employee who has alleged in lawsuits that they reported the university's improper and unethical investigations into sexual assault and were later terminated. Most recently, Peter Brake sued the university along similar grounds and his firing was cited in Woolfolk's filing. Both suits also name as a defendant Ashley Reich, a former top administrator at the university who oversaw the Title IX office.
In a statement to USA TODAY, Liberty University declined to respond to all the allegations but disagreed with Woolfolk's claims. It stated that her termination did not have to do with her race or her interactions with the federal government. Instead, her firing was tied to "legitimate business reasons" related to Title IX investigations.
USA TODAY reached out to Reich for comment but received no response prior to publication.
The Biden-era Education Department in 2024 found that the university had created a culture where students and others were afraid to report sexual violence. The university was penalized $16 million as a result. It also remains on federal monitoring through April 2026.
Liberty has previously said it believed it was treated unfairly by the Biden administration, while agreeing 'there were numerous deficiencies that existed in the past' with its compliance with the Clery Act. That regulation includes requirements for how universities respond to and report sexual assault and other crimes on their campuses.
More: Liberty to pay Jerry Falwell Jr. $15 million settlement after high-profile sex scandal
The government's final report found that college administrators overlooked and failed to track repeat cases of sexual violence on campus, and that it failed to warn students of potential danger. It laid out how university officials tried to cover their tracks by seeking technology staff to delete hard drives.
Liberty, based in Lynchburg, Virginia, is among the nation's largest and most prominent Christian universities. The school is also hugely popular among Republican politicians. Jerry Falwell, a televangelist and conservative figure, started the school in 1971. The university has grown thanks to online students – about 124,000 combined in the 2023-24 academic year, according to the school – and it took nearly $880 million in federal financial aid for its students in the 2022-2023 academic year, according to the Department of Education.
What did Woolfolk allege?
In her lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court in the Western District of Virginia, Woolfolk stated she earned undergraduate and master's degrees at the school and had been working there since 2014. She initially produced content for the Liberty Flames Sports Network, before transferring to the Office of Equity and Compliance/Title IX in 2018.
In that office, she was the only Black employee and faced a hostile work environment, the suit states. She alleged she was paid less than her more inexperienced peers and was asked to work longer hours on more arduous tasks. She said she was denied promotions and accommodations, like remote work, while Reich routinely stayed home, according to the lawsuit.
She also described facing racial comments from her colleagues, like one who stereotyped 'Blacks as either 'black-black' or 'white-black'' with more positive connotations for the latter, according to the lawsuit. The suit also included screenshots from Microsoft Teams chats where her peers joked about naming a coworker's new dog after Confederate generals.
Woolfolk's suit also states that Reich regularly influenced the findings of Title IX cases, either directly or through another employee. In another instance, Woolfolk learned details of a confidential case were improperly shared throughout the office, which 'posed significant risks of prejudice to complainants and respondents.' That was because members of her team would sometimes have to serve as neutral deciders in cases other than their own.
In 2022, Woolfolk spoke to Education Department investigators. Her suit states she told them about numerous violations of Title IX, which included 'systematic efforts to minimize and downplay sexual assault reports; and predetermined case outcomes before investigations were completed.' She also alleged that Reich was aware of her actions.
By June 2024, Woolfolk said she had filed an internal complaint against Reich related to workplace discrimination and retaliation for cooperating with the federal government. She was assigned to work virtually, but was fired days later. The suit stated that the university fired her for unspecified compliance issues. She was terminated on the same day as two other investigators, including Peter Brake, who had also raised complaints about Reich.
Reich now works at the Education Department where she'll be recused from matters involving the school. In a statement to USA TODAY, a department official praised her nearly two decades of working in higher education, policy development and government affairs, and said that she'll help advance President Donald Trump's agenda but didn't offer more details about her role.Woolfolk is seeking legal fees and an unspecified amount of damages.Chris Quintana is an investigative reporter at USA TODAY. He can be reached at cquintana@usatoday.com or via Signal at 202-308-9021. He is on X at @CQuintanaDC
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Schwarzenegger taunts Newsom with message targeting Dem redistricting push
Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is pumping up for a new fight. The longtime Hollywood action star, the last Republican governor in Democrat-dominated California, says he's mobilizing to oppose the push by current Gov. Gavin Newsom to temporarily scrap the state's nonpartisan redistricting commission. 'I'm getting ready for the gerrymandering battle,' Schwarzenegger wrote in a social media post Friday, which included a photo of the former professional bodybuilding champion lifting weights. Schwarzenegger, who rose to worldwide fame as the star of the film 'The Terminator' four decades ago, wore a T-shirt in the photo that said 'terminate gerrymandering.' The social media post by Schwarzenegger comes as Democratic leaders in the Democrat- dominated California legislature are moving forward with new proposed congressional district maps that would create up to five more blue-leaning US House seats in the nation's most populous state. Newsom on Thursday teamed up in Los Angeles with congressional Democrats and legislative leaders in the heavily blue state to unveil their redistricting playbook. 4 Arnold Schwarzenegger wears a 'F*** The Politicians. Terminate Gerrymandering' shirt while working out. Arnold Schwarzenegger/X Newsom and the Democrats are aiming to counter the ongoing effort by President Donald Trump and Republicans to create up to five GOP-friendly congressional districts in red state Texas at the expense of Democrat-controlled seats. 'Today is liberation day in the state of California,' Newsom said. 'Donald Trump, you have poked the bear, and we will punch back.' Newsom vowed to 'meet fire with fire' with his push for a rare — but not unheard of — mid-decade redistricting. 4 California Gov. Gavin Newsom embraces former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger at a news conference in Los Angeles, Calif. on March 22, 2024. Los Angeles Times via Getty Imag The Republican push in Texas, which comes at Trump's urging, is part of a broader effort by the GOP across the country to pad its razor-thin House majority to keep control of the chamber in the 2026 midterms, when the party in power traditionally faces political headwinds and loses seats. Trump and his political team are aiming to prevent what happened during his first term in the White House, when Democrats stormed back to grab the House majority in the 2018 midterms. While the Republican push in Texas to upend the current congressional maps doesn't face constitutional constraints, Newsom's path in California is much more complicated. The governor is pushing to hold a special election this year to get voter approval to undo the constitutional amendments that created the nonpartisan redistricting commission. A two-thirds majority vote in the Democrat-dominated California legislature as early as next week would be needed to hold the referendum. Democratic Party leaders are confident they'll have the votes to push the constitutional amendment and the new proposed congressional maps through the legislature. 'Here we are in open and plain sight before one vote is cast in the 2026 midterm election, and here [Trump] is once again trying to rig the system,' Newsom charged. Newsom said his plan is 'not complicated. We're doing this in reaction to a president of the United States that called a sitting governor in the state of Texas and said, 'Find me five seats.' We're doing it in reaction to that act.' 4 The proposed Congressional district map of California. California State Assembly The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) said 'Newsom's made it clear: he'll shred California's Constitution and trample over democracy — running a cynical, self-serving playbook where Californians are an afterthought, and power is the only priority.' But Newsom defended his actions, saying 'we're working through a very transparent, temporary and public process. We're putting the maps on the ballot and putting the power to the people.' Thursday's appearance by Newsom, considered a likely contender for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, also served as a fundraising kickoff to raise massive amounts of campaign cash needed to sell the redistricting push statewide in California. The nonpartisan redistricting commission, created over 15 years ago, remains popular among most Californians, according to public opinion polling. That's why Newsom and California Democratic lawmakers are promising not to scrap the commission entirely, but rather replace it temporarily by the legislature for the next three election cycles. 'We will affirm our commitment to the state independent redistricting after the 2030 census, but we are asking the voters for their consent to do midterm redistricting,' Newsom said. Their efforts are opposed by a number of people supportive of the nonpartisan commission. 4 Calif. Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a rally about redistricting at the Democracy Center, Japanese American National Museum in Los Angeles on Aug. 14, 2025. Getty Images Among the most visible members is likely to be Schwarzenegger. 'He calls gerrymandering evil, and he means that. He thinks it's truly evil for politicians to take power from people,' Schwarzenegger spokesperson Daniel Ketchell told Politico earlier this month. 'He's opposed to what Texas is doing, and he's opposed to the idea that California would race to the bottom to do the same thing.' Schwarzenegger, during his tenure as governor, had a starring role in the passage of constitutional amendments in California in 2008 and 2010 that took the power to draw state legislative and congressional districts away from politicians and placed it in the hands of an independent commission. 'Most people don't really think about an independent commission much, one way or another. And that's both an opportunity and a challenge for Newsom,' Jack Pitney, an American politics professor at California's Claremont McKenna College, told Fox News. 'It's going to take a lot of effort and money to energize Democrats and motivate them to show up at the polls,' Pitney said, adding Newsom's effort 'is all about motivating people who don't like Trump.' Fox News' Lee Ross contributed to this report
CNN
3 hours ago
- CNN
Over 200 rallies are expected across the country to protest Trump-led redistricting plans
Donald Trump Congressional newsFacebookTweetLink Follow At parks, coffee shops, churches and government buildings around the country, hundreds of people are expected to gather today with a simple message: 'Stop the Trump takeover.' The rallies are a bid to combat Republican-led plans to redraw congressional maps. The main event will take place in Texas, where a new congressional map backed by President Donald Trump that could net Republicans five additional seats in the 2026 midterm elections inspired the state's Democratic lawmakers to flee the state – preventing the quorum needed to vote. 'Trump is terrified of the American people,' said the Texas for All Coalition, which is helping organize the events, in a news release. 'He knows he can't win on his ideas, so he's trying to take Congress by hook or by crook – and he's doing it by silencing the voices of communities of color. We're not going to let that happen.' Organizers emphasized 'a commitment to nonviolence' at all events in event page descriptions. Over 200 events are planned in 34 states, according to the event's official website. The Democratic National Committee is helping organize events, it announced in a news release. 'From coast to coast, people will be showing up at their statehouses, city halls, and community spaces to make it clear – we see what Trump is doing, and we won't stand for it,' said the DNC. A swath of nonprofits and other organizations are also supporting the effort, including Planned Parenthood, the Working Families Party and Human Rights Campaign. Trump described the proposed Texas congressional map as a 'very simple redrawing' at the White House. 'We pick up five seats,' he added. But it doesn't end with Texas. Republican leaders in other states, too, have proposed changing their congressional maps ahead of next year's midterms. The White House is pushing Missouri legislators to consider a special session to redraw maps. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has floated the idea of changing his state's maps, and has said he thinks the Trump administration should give the state another seat. In Ohio, maps must be redrawn due to a quirk of state law – which may make the state's delegation even more Republican and carve up two Democratic seats, according to a report in June from CNN's Fredreka Schouten. Democratic lawmakers have announced their own plans to fight back, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who kicked off his own redistricting push on Thursday. Here's more on what we know about today's protests. Today's largest protest is slated to happen in Austin, Texas. Over 1,000 people have RSVPed for the event, which will start at the state's Capitol. 'Texas is being used as a testing ground for extremist policies and partisan games that don't reflect our values,' reads the event page. 'Thousands of Texans have shown up against the racially gerrymandered congressional map lawmakers are trying to force through in order to weaken the voting power of communities of color.' Former Congressman Beto O'Rourke, United Farm Workers cofounder Dolores Huerta, Democratic US Rep. Greg Casar and Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas are expected to speak, according to a news release from the Texas for All Coalition. Drag queen Brigitte Bandit and singer Gina Chavez are also expected to perform. Across Texas, events are also planned in Houston, Dallas, San Angelo, Tyler, McAllen, Conroe and Kingwood. Events and rallies are also scheduled in dozens of other states, both in Democratic strongholds and Republican-majority states. Local organizers are planning each city-specific event. In New York City, demonstrators are expected to gather in Central Park. In Washington, DC, where Trump has deployed the National Guard and declared a federal takeover of the local police department, organizers are painting banners and signs to place around the city. Protesters in Raleigh and Durham, North Carolina, plan to hold a 'bridge brigade,' holding signs on 16 different bridges. Demonstrations are also planned in Cincinnati, Ohio; Sarasota, Florida; and Jefferson City, Missouri, among other cities. The planned events include rallies, teach-ins, banner drops and art-making at locations that include a bookstore in Jacksonville, Florida, and a Tesla showroom in Palo Alto, California. The demonstrations follow a string of other protests organized since Trump took office for the second time in January, including the 'No Kings' protests in June and demonstrations against the president's deportation campaign in July. Drucilla Tigner, the executive director of statewide coalition Texas For All, said in a news release that the fight extends far past Texas. 'Across Texas, and across the country, communities are speaking out in a united voice to call for an end to the Trump takeover,' she said. 'Though this fight started in Texas, it doesn't end here. This isn't just about redistricting or one state's politics.' 'It's about the future of our democracy.'
San Francisco Chronicle
4 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's aggressive push to take over DC policing may be a template for an approach in other cities
WASHINGTON (AP) — The left sees President Donald Trump's attempted takeover of Washington law enforcement as part of a multifront march to autocracy — 'vindictive authoritarian rule,' as one activist put it — and as an extraordinary thing to do in rather ordinary times on the streets of the capital. To the right, it's a bold move to fracture the crust of Democratic urban bureaucracy and make D.C. a better place to live. Where that debate settles — if it ever does — may determine whether Washington, a symbol for America in all its granite glory, history, achievement, inequality and dysfunction, becomes a model under the imprint of Trump for how cities are policed, cleaned up and run, or ruined. Under the name of his Making D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force, Trump put some 800 National Guard troops on Washington streets this past week, declaring at the outset, 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals.' Grunge was also on his mind. 'If our capital is dirty, our whole country is dirty, and they don't respect us.' He then upped the stakes by declaring federal control of the district's police department and naming an emergency chief. That set off alarms and prompted local officials to sue to stop the effort. 'I have never seen a single government action that would cause a greater threat to law and order than this dangerous directive,' Police Chief Pamela Smith said. On Friday, the Trump administration partially retreated from its effort to seize control of the Metropolitan Police Department when a judge, skeptical that the president had the authority to do what he tried to do, urged both sides to reach a compromise, which they did — at least for now. Trump's Justice Department agreed to leave Smith in control, while still intending to instruct her department on law enforcement practices. In a new memo, Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the force to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. In this heavily Democratic city, local officials and many citizens did not like the National Guard deployment. At the same time, they acknowledged the Republican president had the right to order it because of the federal government's unique powers in the district. But Trump's attempt to seize formal control of the police department, for the first time since D.C. gained a partial measure of autonomy in the Home Rule Act of 1973, was their red line. When the feds stepped in For sure, there have been times when the U.S. military has been deployed to American streets, but almost always in the face of a riot or a calamitous event like the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Trump's use of force was born of an emergency that he saw and city officials — and many others — did not. A stranger to nuance, Trump has used the language of emergency to justify much of what he's done: his deportations of foreigners, his tariffs, his short-term deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles, and now his aggressive intervention into Washington policing. Washington does have crime and endemic homelessness, like every city in the country. But there was nothing like an urban fire that the masses thought needed to be quelled. Violent crime is down, as it is in many U.S. cities. Washington is also a city about which most Americans feel ownership — or at least that they have a stake. More than 25 million of them visited in 2024, a record year, plus over 2 million people from abroad. It's where middle schoolers on field trips get to see what they learn about in class — and perhaps to dance to pop tunes with the man with the music player so often in front of the White House. Washington is part federal theme park, with its historic buildings and museums, and part downtown, where restaurants and lobbyists outnumber any corporate presence. Neighborhoods range from the places where Jeff Bezos set a record for a home purchase price to destitute streets in economically depressed areas that are also magnets for drugs and crime. In 1968, the capital was a city on fire with riots. Twenty years later, a murder spree and crack epidemic fed the sense of a place out of control. But over the last 30 years, the city's population and its collective wealth have swelled. A cooked-up emergency? Against that backdrop, Philadelphia's top prosecutor, District Attorney Larry Krasner, a Democrat, assailed Trump's moves in Washington. 'You're talking about an emergency, really?' Krasner said, as if speaking with the president. 'Or is it that you're talking about an emergency because you want to pretend everything is an emergency so that you can roll tanks?" In Washington, a coalition of activists called Not Above the Law denounced what they saw as just the latest step by Trump to seize levers of power he has no business grasping. 'The onslaught of lawlessness and autocratic activities has escalated,' said Lisa Gilbert, co-chair of the group and co-president of Public Citizen. 'The last two weeks should have crystallized for all Americans that Donald Trump will not stop until democracy is replaced by vindictive authoritarian rule.' Fifty miles northeast, in the nearest major city, Baltimore's Democratic mayor criticized what he saw as Trump's effort to distract the public from economic pain and 'America's falling standing in the world.' 'Every mayor and police chief in America works with our local federal agents to do great work — to go after gun traffickers, to go after violent organizations,' Brandon Scott said. 'How is taking them off of that job, sending them out to just patrol the street, making our country safer?' But the leader of the D.C. Police Union, Gregg Pemberton, endorsed Trump's intervention — while saying it should not become permanent. 'We stand with the president in recognizing that Washington, D.C., cannot continue on this trajectory,' Pemberton said. From his vantage point, 'Crime is out of control, and our officers are stretched beyond their limits.' The Home Rule Act lets a president invoke certain emergency powers over the police department for 30 days, after which Congress must decide whether to extend the period. Trump's attempt to use that provision stirred interest among some Republicans in Congress in giving him an even freer hand. Among them, Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee drafted a resolution that would eliminate the time limit on federal control. This, he told Fox News Digital, would 'give the president all the time and authority he needs to crush lawlessness, restore order, and reclaim our capital once and for all.' Which raises a question that Trump has robustly hinted at and others are wondering, too: If there is success in the district — at least, success in the president's eyes — what might that mean for other American cities he thinks need to be fixed? Where does — where could — the federal government go next?
