Attorney on call · 24/7 · Risk-free consultation
212 300 5196
SECTION C · ALLEGATION TYPE · C24

Conduct on a study-abroad programme.

Title IX does not apply outside the United States. That is a clear statutory limit and it requires dismissal of a Title IX complaint arising from conduct abroad - after which most institutions proceed under their own conduct code, which claims jurisdiction anyway and offers fewer protections.
MAKE THE ARGUMENT ANYWAY
Mandatory dismissal is a right. Winning it narrows the forum and creates a documented procedural record even where the conduct code picks the matter up.
WHICH RULES GOVERN YOUR CASE The 2020 Title IX regulations. The 2024 rewrite was vacated and does not apply.
RULE TRACKER →
THE BRIEFING · STUDY-ABROAD ALLEGATIONS

Allegations arising overseas sit outside Title IX by the plain terms of the rule, and inside the institution’s own conduct code by the plain terms of most handbooks. Both halves of that matter.

The territorial limit.

The 2020 regulations apply to sexual harassment against a person in the United States. Conduct occurring on a study-abroad programme in another country falls outside that scope, and the rule requires dismissal of the Title IX complaint where the alleged conduct did not occur in an education programme or activity or did not occur in the United States. That dismissal is mandatory rather than discretionary, and it should be requested in writing with the provision cited.

What follows the dismissal.

Almost every institution maintains a student conduct code claiming jurisdiction over conduct on institutional programmes wherever they take place. The matter typically moves there, and the procedural protections thin considerably - no federally required live hearing, frequently no cross-examination, and in many systems a single administrator who investigates and decides. Winning the scope argument is still worth doing: it narrows the charge, it creates a documented procedural record, and where a school re-charges immediately under a thinner process, that sequence is itself objectionable.

The evidentiary reality.

Overseas incidents produce incomplete records. Local venue video is not obtainable, non-student witnesses are outside any institutional reach, host-country police records are inaccessible, and message and payment evidence may sit on foreign platforms. That incompleteness cuts against whoever bears the burden, which is the institution - and stating precisely which categories of evidence cannot be obtained is a stronger argument than any characterisation of the night itself.

Why you should call us.

If you are scrolling through search results trying to find someone to defend you, your search is over. You have found Spodek Law Group P.C. - and we are not your average defense firm. We know a thing or two about defending the accused in campus cases - and in the criminal courts that run alongside them. Over 50 years of combined experience, some of the toughest cases in the country, and we have come out on top. We have seen it all, and we empathise with you. We understand how frightening this is, and we have a legal team who can fight and win.

Unlike other attorneys who care about their reputation with the administrators and the prosecutors, our only goal is getting you the best outcome. We owe loyalty to only you. Our lawyers listen to you, your fears, and your goals. We care about your story, and that is where the work begins - by understanding and listening to you.

On billing, we are transparent about our fees, and there are no surprises. Choosing a lawyer is a big deal and cost is a real issue, so we are committed to being your champion irrespective of your ability to pay. Our firm has a simple belief: lawyers should only take on clients whom they can truly help. Many firms are mills that take every case through the door. We do not.

Working with us starts with a risk-free consultation, in person or over the phone. You can ask us anything, for as long as it takes, and we encourage you to ask the tough questions. We are available 24/7, we practise coast to coast, and every client has direct access to a partner. Call 212 300 5196 - an attorney answers.

GENERAL INFORMATION, NOT LEGAL ADVICE. YOUR SCHOOL’S POLICY AND YOUR FACTS DECIDE EVERYTHING - AND THE CONSULTATION IS FREE. Skip reading - just call →
THE EXTRATERRITORIAL LIMIT
Six points.
This is one of the cleanest scope arguments in the practice, and it is routinely not made.
POINT 01
Title IX is territorial
The rule applies to conduct against a person in the United States.
CLEAR LIMIT
POINT 02
Mandatory dismissal
Where conduct occurred abroad, the Title IX complaint must be dismissed.
A RIGHT
POINT 03
The conduct code continues
Most codes claim jurisdiction over programme conduct wherever it occurs.
THE REROUTE
POINT 04
Fewer protections
No federal hearing requirement applies to the code process.
THE COST
POINT 05
Evidence abroad
Witnesses, video, and records in another country are frequently unobtainable.
BOTH WAYS
POINT 06
Local law
Conduct may also engage the criminal law of the host country.
SEPARATE RISK
Evidentiary incompleteness is the real argument. Where the incident occurred overseas, the institution frequently cannot obtain video, local records, or non-student witnesses. That incompleteness is stated in the ten-day response as a limit on what the record can establish.
THE RESPONSE
Four moves.
Two arguments run together: the scope point, and the thinness of an overseas evidentiary record.
01Demand dismissal in writing
Cite the territorial limit and ask for dismissal of the Title IX complaint.
02Read the code’s reach
What it claims over programme conduct abroad, and whether the language actually covers this.
03Document what cannot be obtained
Every category of evidence unavailable because of location.
04Check host-country exposure
Local criminal law is independent of anything the institution does.
KEEP READING · THE TITLE IX SET
Where this page hands you off.
No page on this site is a dead end. These are the next questions people ask after this one, in the order they usually ask them.
Todd A. Spodek, Managing Partner
FIG. - THE PRINCIPAL
THE LAWYER THE PRESS CALLS
You've seen the defense on Netflix. This is the firm behind it.

Todd A. Spodek is a second-generation trial lawyer whose defense of Anna Delvey became Netflix's Inventing Anna. He appears on Fox News and CNN as a legal analyst, authored "My Advice to Diddy" in The Spectator, and is quoted by the Associated Press when the biggest federal cases break. The record behind the profile: a complete acquittal in a $26M money-laundering trial, RICO charges carrying a 10-year minimum dismissed, and 6 months on a $12M Ponzi case.

Why this firm.

SPODEK LAW GROUP P.C. · EST. 1976
01
Second generation, since 1976

Thousands of clients across five decades. We have dealt with your issue before.

02
Loyalty to only you

No allegiance to prosecutors or judges. The client is the only constituency.

03
Nationwide, fully online

A complete client portal - documents, invoices, communications - coast to coast.

04
Selective by design

We only take clients we can truly help - and every accepted case gets the whole bench.

THE FIRM FILM · 00:45 · WHO WE ARE
ALL APPEARANCES →
45 SECONDS INSIDE THE FIRM

See who fights for you before you ever call.

Who we are, how we work, and why clients nationwide trust us with their future - in under a minute.

The Spodek Law Group P.C. bench

The team on your case.

EVERY ACCEPTED CASE GETS THE WHOLE BENCH · 24/7
Meet the bench →
Todd A. Spodek
MANAGING PARTNER
Todd A. Spodek
The Netflix defense · Fox & CNN analyst
Ralph P. Franco, Jr.
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Ralph P. Franco, Jr.
Court appearances · case strategy
Alex Zhik
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Alex Zhik
Criminal defense · client strategy
Jeremy Feigenbaum, working the file
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Jeremy Feigenbaum
Motions · investigations
Claire Banks
ASSOCIATE
Claire Banks
Federal motions · S.D.N.Y. & E.D.N.Y.
Joseph Alter
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Joseph Alter
Trial practice · not guilty on all counts, 2025
RB
OF-COUNSEL
Rajesh Barua
Immigration · removal defense
CL
OF-COUNSEL
Chad Lewin
Los Angeles · 23+ years
50+ years combined
Second generation, since 1976. Selective by design - loyal to only you.
PUT THEM ON YOUR CASE →

How your case unfolds.

THE FULL PROCESS →
01 · TODAY
The consultation

Risk-free, in person or by phone. Ask anything, for as long as it takes. Strategy starts the same day.

02
Investigation & evidence

Witnesses, reports, footage, experts - building the record that pokes holes in theirs.

03
Motions, negotiation - or trial

Suppress, dismiss, negotiate from strength. And if trial is the advantage - we are unafraid.

★★★★★VERIFIED CLIENT · FEDERAL CASE · 2022 · VIA GOOGLE REVIEWS
"The best lawyer anyone could ask for. Todd changed our lives."
1,100+ FIVE-STAR GOOGLE REVIEWS →
FROM THE RECORD · S.D.N.Y. & BEYOND
Acquittal$26M money laundering
DismissedRICO - 10-year mandatory minimum
6 months$12M Ponzi - prosecutors asked for years
RISK FREE · CONFIDENTIAL · 24/7

Get ahead of the case.

Answered within 24 hours, guaranteed. Some stories are better told out loud -

212 300 5196
AFTER YOU REACH OUT
01A person answers - not a service. Day or night. 02Free, confidential consultation - ask us anything, regardless of how long it takes. 03Strategy starts the same day - and you hold the senior partner's cell number.
★★★★★1,100+ FIVE-STAR GOOGLE REVIEWS
READ THEM →
INTAKE · PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL
24/7
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
01
02
03
04
05
EVERYTHING YOU SHARE IS PROTECTED BY ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE FROM THE FIRST WORD.