⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Seventh Circuit hears Cephus versus Blank, a dispute over a university's handling of sexual-assault allegations against a football player. Two fellow students accused Cephus of sexual assault. The University of Wisconsin-Madison investigated, held a disciplinary hearing, and expelled him. A jury later acquitted him in the separate criminal case. After reviewing additional information, the university lifted the expulsion and let him return, although some misconduct findings remained. Cephus then sued, claiming that the university's earlier process discriminated against him because he is a man. The district court entered summary judgment for the defendants, finding insufficient evidence for a jury to infer sex discrimination. That ended this civil case without a trial. On appeal, Cephus will argue that the evidence must be considered together: the university's messaging about sexual assault, its scheduling choices, and gaps in the investigative record. The university will respond that the record shows opportunities to participate, not discrimination based on sex. Title Nine prohibits sex discrimination in education. Listen for the link between alleged procedural flaws and discrimination based on sex; the lawyers also dispute whether some evidence was properly disclosed and submitted.

Quintez Cephus v. Rebecca Blank (No. 25-3089) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued November 4, 2026.