School leaders said the student will face repercussions for their actions.
JAMESTOWN, N.C. — A student attacked a school administrator Wednesday at Ragsdale High School in Jamestown, according to Guilford County Schools.
School leaders said the student will face disciplinary action in accordance with the school district's policy. According to the student handbook, an assault by a student on an adults will result in a 10-day out of school suspension and law enforcement will be called.
GCS leaders said a teacher called for an administrator Wednesday to get some assistance in the classroom. The administrator approached a female student to try and help them and the student then punched the administrator, according to GCS. District officials said a School Resource Officer was coming to the classroom and tried to escort the student away but he student then punched the SRO. The SRO was then able to get the student to the ground and escorted her out of the classroom.
A district spokesperson said it will be up to the Guilford County Sheriff's Office as to whether there is any criminal consequences against the student.
The grade level of the student is unknown at this time, but they were not injured. The administrator did sustain injuries but is back at work.
"The first thing that goes through my mind is that violence in our classrooms is not acceptable in any way," said Mike Richey, the executive director of emergency management for GCS.
Richey said one of the things that the district will continue to do to avoid these kind of situations is to provide mental health support in the form of guidance counselors.
"The number one thing we need to do is recognize what’s going in our school and in our community because we are a microcosm of the community," said Richey. "So first of all we need to understand that there are some pretty severe mental health issues as a result of the pandemic and this is community wide."
GCS leaders said it takes the entire community to make sure their schools stay safe.
"The number one way you can help us as by helping us build a relationship with our children and our children building relationships with us because nothing is going to keep a school safer than having a strong relationship between the students and the trusted adult that they work with," said Richey.
MORE WAYS TO GET WFMY NEWS 2
Subscribe to our daily newsletter Let’s Get 2 It!
ADD THE WFMY+ APP TO YOUR STREAMING DEVICE
ROKU: Add the channel from the ROKU store or by searching for WFMY.
Amazon Fire TV: Search for WFMY to find the free app to add to your account. You can also add the app directly to your Fire TV through your Amazon account.
METAIRIE (WVUE) - Jefferson Parish Public School officials say a John Q. Adams Middle School administrator is on leave after an incident with a student on Tuesday (Aug. 23).
The mother of the student posted a photo on Facebook showing an adult grabbing her daughter by the hair.
Jefferson Parish Schools Chief of Staff Gabrielle Misfeldt said she could not confirm the identity of the school administrator, “as it is a personnel matter.” The student’s mother says the employee’s name is Melissa Sallinger.
Sallinger could face disciplinary measures after the conclusion of an investigation into the incident.
The student’s mother did not want to go on camera for an interview, but says her daughter was in an argument with a classmate when the administrator came over and grabbed her by the hair.
See a spelling or grammar error in our story? Click Here to report it. Please include the headline.
STANFORD — Following two highly publicized reports of sexual assault on campus in accurate months, hundreds of Stanford students on Friday marched to the main quad to protest what they say is the university’s lackluster efforts to prevent future rapes.
Last Friday a woman was raped after a man grabbed her from her Stanford University office and dragged her into a basement. The brazen attack came just two months to the day after another woman was abducted in broad daylight from a parking lot near a Stanford dorm and forced into a bathroom, where she was raped.
For many who marched across campus chanting slogans like “Stanford protects rapists” and “expel rapists,” the accurate assaults are too much to bear years after the university was in the spotlight over the brutal assault committed by former student Brock Turner. The widespread fear and anger among women on campus was palpable Friday as students articulated their demands to the administration, urging them to take action and demonstrate its “honest commitment to fundamental change of rape culture” at the university.
Sofia Scarlat, a sociology student and member of Sexual Violence Free Stanford who organized the event, said the protest Friday was to demand action from administrators.
She said the group has three demands: that the university terminate the employment of faculty and staff with findings of Title IX violations, and expel students who are found to have committed sexual assault; that the school significantly increase the number of Confidential Support Team counselors and provide mandatory trauma-informed training for all counselors and Vaden Health Center workers; and that it also fully implement a new curriculum to serve all first-year gender marginalized people on an opt out basis, and a parallel curriculum for all other students, beginning in 2024.
The students also want Stanford to make an initial financial commitment of no less than $1 million to ensure that trainers are hired immediately and to provide for the program’s ongoing success.
For Scarlat, these aren’t difficult-to-accomplish demands for the university, which is among the top tier schools in the nation with billions in its endowment.
“Stanford must be held accountable for the environment that they created which has empowered rapists to offend and reoffend,” Scarlat said. “These are all in my opinion very reasonable demands and all things they promised to do after the Brock Turner case of sexual assault and then failed to follow through on.”
Sexual violence prevention advocates like Scarlat have said they routinely receive reports of assaults on campus from women living in dorms or attending parties — part of a nationwide scourge of sexual assault and harassment in higher education. But the two accurate rape cases have stood out for their brazen, and violent, nature.
Scarlat pointed to a 2019 survey commissioned by Stanford that found nearly 40% of undergraduate women experienced nonconsensual sexual contact after at least four years at the university. Yet most of the time, those women decided not to contact a Stanford program or resource for help.Neither Stanford’s president, provost, communications team nor its Department of Public Safety have responded to requests by this news organization for additional details about the two cases, including whether the two incidents could be connected in any way.
Since the two rapes, a Department of Public Safety spokesman said the university has increased mobile and foot patrols across the campus. For many students, the university’s response is unacceptable, as more public safety patrols aren’t the answer.
“Security will not stop 40% of undergraduate women-identifying students from being assaulted in their four years,” said activist and student Eva Jones. “It will further marginalize gender-marginalized and students of color experiencing sexual violence. It’s not the solution for ending sexual assault on our campus.”
“We want accountability, we want to expel rapists from our campus and we want to provide support for survivors,” Jones added.
Jakob Rodgers contributed to this report.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
In late August, the Biden administration announced its intent to cancel an estimated $500 billion in student debt held by more than 40 million borrowers. President Biden previously expressed doubts about his authority to take this very action.
Nevertheless, Biden and his Education Department located a previously untapped source of purported authority—the HEROES Act of 2003. This law, passed in the early days of the Iraq War, was meant to temporarily freeze student loans held by service members and their families during times of war or national emergency.
Now the Biden administration has stretched the meaning of "emergency" beyond recognition and attempted an end-run around Congress.
In the ordinary course, following a presidential announcement of a new policy or program, the executive agency charged with carrying out the president’s wishes would engage in the rulemaking process mandated by Congress. This includes providing notice of the draft rule, giving the public time to comment on it, addressing concerns raised by public comments that sometimes require changes to the proposed rule, and, finally, publishing a final rule that binds the public.
STUDENT LOAN RELIEF APPLICATIONS ARRIVING SOON: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
This student loan forgiveness plan, however, is anything but ordinary.
Instead of following the usual course, the administration issued a handful of press releases, a fact sheet, and two memos offering pretextual legal justifications. These constitute the entirety of publicly available information.
Despite assurances from the administration to Congress and the public that automatic cancellations would begin for eight million borrowers in early October, no draft rule has been released.
Compounding this disregard of the normal rulemaking process is the series of arbitrary changes the administration has made on the fly in response to legal challenges.
Pacific Legal Foundation (where we work) filed suit on behalf of Frank Garrison, an attorney enrolled in a preexisting loan forgiveness program that Congress created. Garrison faced a hefty state tax bill if his loans were automatically canceled under the new program.
Responding to a reporter’s question during a briefing, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre replied that borrowers such as Garrison simply could "opt out" of the program, even though the Education Department website said otherwise.
The website was changed that same day to fit the press secretary’s claim. A federal district judge then denied Garrison’s initial motion for a temporary restraining order but made the government pinky swear not to begin cancellation of debt until the challenger has an opportunity to file an amended complaint.
A group of states also filed suit and met a similar fate: the Biden administration quickly "revised" its unwritten, seemingly ephemeral plan to exempt the affected borrowers.
The administration’s actions were an obvious attempt to end both cases without having to defend the legality of its policy, doubtless because the loan cancellation program is blatantly unlawful.
No statute gives the president carte blanche to cancel student debts. The HEROES Act authorizes the Education Department to waive or modify student loan requirements for those residing or working in a "disaster area" related to a national emergency. This was intended to ease certain bureaucratic burdens (for example, by extending grace periods and waiving documentation requirements) for service members and their families so they would not be placed in a worse financial position because of emergencies or military operations.
That’s a far cry from the broad claim of authority to cancel half a trillion dollars in student loans. Congress doesn’t hide elephants in mouseholes, as Justice Antonin Scalia once wrote, and President Biden’s student loan forgiveness is mammoth.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINION NEWSLETTER
This is not an isolated incident of executive overreach. It is yet another example of the executive branch unreasonably stretching modest grants of power to reach policy goals Congress never approved. The Supreme Court struck down the CDC’s eviction moratorium and OSHA’s vaccine mandate as far exceeding anything Congress authorized. Likewise, here, the Education Department cannot twist the HEROES Act to make half a trillion dollars in student debt vanish.
The Biden administration knows all of this, which is why they are doing backflips to avoid a court challenge. They should not be allowed to get away with it.
That’s why we’re amending our suit to represent every borrower facing unwanted loan cancellation coupled with state tax liability. We also argue that allowing borrowers to "opt out" is not enough to save this unwritten, ever-changing plan. So far, the Education Department has simply delayed the inevitable: judicial scrutiny of its outrageous violation of the law.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The administration would have been wise to listen to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., when she remarked, "People think that the president of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not. … That has to be an act of Congress.… The president can’t do it."
Indeed. And if this president gets away with it, other presidents will too.
Elizabeth Slattery is a Senior Legal Fellow and Michael Poon is an Attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm dedicated to the principles of individual rights and limited government.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM ELIZABETH SLATTERY
Zakiya Brown strives to make Lincoln University a welcoming campus.
She eats lunch with students at the university cafeteria every day. And you can usually find her in the crowd at student events.
She also designates time each week to simply meet with students.
"It's important because I'm here for them," Brown said. "The title itself is student affairs, so it's the responsibility of creating the experience for students. So for me, it's, even though I'm in meetings, they have to know who are their advocates. Who are the individuals making decisions on their behalf."
Brown is Lincoln's vice president of student affairs and enrollment management, which means she wears a lot of hats overseeing campus housing, student engagement, career services, health services, the admissions office, campus bookstore, and food and vending services. She's also the university's Title IX coordinator and chief diversity officer.
"It's never the same day to day," she said.
And there's always more work to be done, which Brown said is what has kept her motivated throughout her 18 years in higher education.
Brown is a product of the HBCU experience, having attended Central State University in Ohio, which is where she also started her career in higher education.
Like many involved with student affairs, Brown started as a residential adviser her senior year of undergraduate school. She planned to take a gap year before starting law school, but found a calling in higher education.
"You find out if it's really what you want to do because you learn things about individuals and about yourself," she said. "And in that time, I learned that I really wanted to continue to help people. I really had an interest in helping students."
Brown said she wants to ensure students are aware of her presence and role on campus. She sees herself as an advocate and resource for students, so she goes where they are.
Brown said the time she spends with students is also a way for her to stay informed on the issues that matter most to them.
In addition to leaving time open for students to stop by, Brown meets regularly with Lincoln's Student Government Association president and student residential advisors.
"Our responsibility and our role is to make sure they're having an experience that is intentional for them, and not just for us and what we believe should be the student experience," she explained. "I have to admit that I'm nearly 20 years removed from my undergraduate experience so for me, I can't say what I think is important. I need to have them share with me what they want to see so I can take that back to my colleagues for us to create that opportunity for them."
When not with students, Brown spends a lot of time in strategy meetings with leaders across campus to find ways the university can better serve students and provide a meaningful college experience, she said.
Whether its institutional challenges, external barriers, social events, personal lives or anything else, Brown said it's important to her to stay on top of what's impacting students.
"The world that they navigate continues to bring new dynamics and challenges to them, so for me the work is never done because our world continues to move and shape and shift," she said. "Times change, trends change, needs change, demands change, the workforce changes, so for me it's staying abreast of everything to make sure that they have what they need to be successful."
Brown said there may be some processes Lincoln could update to make student experiences better as the institution moves through its evolution.
Mental health, for example, has become a hot Topic on college campuses in accurate years. The resources are out there, Brown said, but the challenge lies more with promoting the resources and getting students to use them.
That's something Brown said she might discuss with campus leaders in strategic planning meetings.
Brown, an Ohio native, moved to Jefferson City about three years ago and has become involved in the community as well. She serves as vice chair of the Rape and Abuse Crisis Service board.
She got involved with the nonprofit shortly after beginning her role as Title IX coordinator at Lincoln, a position responsible for preventing sexual harassment and misconduct on campus.
She said the invitation to join the board seemed like a natural fit.
"It's important to me. It's meaningful work," she said. "They're providing resources for at least nine counties within Missouri, so it was just intentional. It aligned in different ways."
(NEXSTAR) — The day has finally come — well, almost.
After weeks of waiting, the White House appears to be gearing up to forgive the federal student loan debt of millions of Americans after alerting borrowers Thursday about what to expect through the process.
First, it’s important to know whether or not you qualify for this one-time loan forgiveness. This will depend on the type of loans you have, whether you received a Pell Grant, and your income in 2020 or 2021. If you meet the qualifications, you’ll receive up to $10,000 in forgiveness, or $20,000 if you ever received a Pell Grant.
Since President Joe Biden announced the widespread forgiveness plan in August, the White House and the Department of Education have said the process would begin “in early October.” Borrowers were encouraged to sign up for an email notification that would alert them about the forgiveness process.
The first email to those borrowers who signed up for notifications was sent Thursday, two days before October begins.
The email doesn’t give a firm date on when the application will open, but it does outline what the application process will entail.
Sometime in the coming days, the Education Department says it will launch a “short and simple” application. You won’t need to provide any supporting documents or use your Federal Student Aid ID to submit the application, according to Thursday’s email.
After your application has been submitted, it will be reviewed to determine if you qualify for debt relief, and the Education Department will “work with your loan servicer(s) to process your relief.” Though you don’t have to submit any documents, the department notes that borrowers may be contacted if “additional information” is needed.
The Education Department went on to warn borrowers to be wary of scammers. Any company that contacts you saying they will help you get your loans discharged or forgiven for a fee is running a scam — there is no fee for this federal student loan forgiveness. Only the Education Department and your loan servicers will handle your loan forgiveness.
Nearly 8 million borrowers may not have to apply for loan forgiveness, the Education Department announced previously. Instead, because the department already has their updated income data, these borrowers will be able to get relief automatically.
Those who apply should see relief within four to six weeks, according to the Education Department. If you apply before Nov. 15, officials say forgiveness should be applied to your account before the payment pause ends on Dec. 31. Your student loan servicer will notify you once relief has been applied to your loans, according to the Education Department.
Additionally, if you’ve been making voluntary payments on your loans since March 2020, you are likely eligible to have those payments automatically refunded. More details can be found here.
Once the Education Department does make the application available, borrowers will have until the end of December 2023 to apply.
A lawsuit was filed earlier this week challenging Biden’s loan forgiveness. Shortly after the email was sent to borrowers, six Republican-led states announced they are suing the Biden administration in an effort to halt forgiveness as well. There are more than 2 million people within those states that are expected to qualify for loan forgiveness, a White House fact sheet shows.
It’s unclear if these suits will impact the process.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
The Biden administration is scaling back its debt relief program for millions of Americans over concerns about legal challenges from the student loan industry as well as a new lawsuit from Republican-led states.
In a reversal, the Education Department said on Thursday it would no longer allow borrowers who have federal student loans that are owned by private entities to qualify for the relief program. The administration had previously said those borrowers would have a path to receive up to $10,000 or $20,000 of loan forgiveness.
The policy change comes as the Biden administration this week faces its first major legal challenges to the loan forgiveness program, which Republicans have railed against as an illegal use of executive power that is too costly for taxpayers.
On Thursday, a group of six GOP attorneys general sued to block loan forgiveness. The states of Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Carolina asked a federal judge to strike down the debt cancellation program, arguing that it’s illegal and unconstitutional.
The student loans that are guaranteed by the federal government but held by private entities account for a relatively small, and shrinking, subset of all outstanding federal student debt. They comprise just several million of the roughly 45 million Americans with federal student loans.
But there are significant business interests that depend on the federally guaranteed loan program — a wide range of private lenders, banks, guaranty agencies, loan servicers and investors. That industry is widely seen, both inside and outside the administration, as presenting the greatest legal risk to the debt relief program.
Many of those companies face economic losses when they lose borrowers who convert their federally guaranteed loans into new loans that are made directly by the Education Department through a process known as consolidation.
Administration officials said when they announced the debt relief program in August that borrowers with federally guaranteed loans should consolidate their loans in order to receive loan forgiveness.
The Education Department said Thursday that borrowers who already took those steps to receive loan forgiveness would still receive it. The agency said it would still provide debt relief to borrowers “who have applied to consolidate into the Direct Loan program prior to Sept. 29, 2022.” But the department said that path is no longer available to borrowers after the new guidance.
“Our goal is to provide relief to as many eligible borrowers as quickly and easily as possible, and this will allow us to achieve that goal while we continue to explore additional legally available options to provide relief to borrowers with privately owned FFEL loans and Perkins loans, including whether FFEL borrowers could receive one-time debt relief without needing to consolidate,” an Education Department spokesperson said in a statement.
The privately held federal student loans featured prominently in the new lawsuit filed by GOP attorneys general on Thursday.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Missouri, is based, in part, on the theory that the states are harmed directly by the Biden administration taking steps to forgive federal student loans held by private entities.
For example, in the lawsuit, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt argues that the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, a quasi-state entity, which owns and services federally guaranteed student loans, faces economic harm from the debt relief program.
Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson argues in the lawsuit that some of his state’s pension fund is invested in securities that are backed by federally guaranteed loans. The lawsuit says the Biden relief program could cut in half the size of that market and hurt the state’s investments in it.
Some of the other states, however, argue that the entire student debt relief program — not just the federally guaranteed part — will cause them economic injury. They argue they’ll face lost tax revenue as a result of Biden’s student debt relief program for all types of federal student loans.
The Education Department spokesperson said the policy change would affect “only a small percentage of borrowers.” The most accurate federal data, as of June 30, shows there were 4.1 million federal borrowers with $108.8 billion of loans held by private lenders.
Administration officials argued that the policy change would directly affect far fewer than millions of borrowers because a large share of the borrowers were never set to receive the relief in the first place or have other avenues to obtain relief.
Some 1.6 million borrowers with privately held federal student loans also have a direct loan, according to an administration official. Those borrowers will still be able to obtain debt relief on their direct loan, the official said, though it is possible that they will receive less overall relief.
Another 1.5 million borrowers have a certain type of privately held federal loan — an FFEL consolidation loan — would have faced a complex process for making their loans eligible for relief, according to an administration official.
Combined with some additional drop-off for borrowers who exceed the income limits of the program, administration officials argue that only about 770,000 borrowers would be directly affected by the policy change.
Earlier this month, the Biden administration released data estimating that 42.4 million borrowers across the country would be eligible for its debt relief program.
It’s not clear why the Biden administration decided on Thursday to pull the plug on allowing the subset of federal student loan borrowers to participate in the program. Industry officials and a wide range of policy experts had long warned — even before the administration’s August announcement — about the legal complexities associated with the federal government forgiving federally guaranteed student loans.
Top Education Department officials and industry groups had for weeks been negotiating a compromise deal in which the companies were compensated for their losses and would avoid suing the administration over the issue.
Those discussions have not yet produced a deal, but the administration signaled on Thursday they would continue negotiating.
The Education Department said on its website Thursday it “is assessing whether there are alternative pathways to provide relief to borrowers with federal student loans not held by [the Education Department], including FFEL Program loans and Perkins Loans, and is discussing this with private lenders.”
The Biden administration is pulling back on its student debt relief program amid numerous legal challenges, including six new lawsuits filed by Republican-led states.
In a reversal from Biden’s original sweeping proposal in August to cancel federal student loans up to $20,000, the US Department of Education announced Thursday that it would not forgive debt from borrowers whose student loans are owned by private entities.
The White House faced its first legal challenges to the controversial program this week, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated Monday would cost taxpayers $400 billion.
In the latest lawsuit filed in federal court in Missouri on Thursday, Republican attorneys general from Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and South Carolina requested that the relief program be shut down, arguing that it’s unconstitutional and is “not remotely tailored to address the effects of the pandemic on federal student loan borrowers.”
While the federal student loans tied up with private entities account for just a small percentage of the potentially 42 million Americans affected by the program, there are significant business interests — including banks, guaranty agencies, loan servicers and investors — that pose a legal threat to the program, according to Politico.
Many businesses and companies would lose money lent to borrowers who converted their federal guaranteed loans into consolidated new loans made to the Department of Education.
As of June 30, federal data show there were 4.1 million federal borrowers with $108.8 billion worth of loans owned by private lenders, Politico reported.
Under Biden’s plan unveiled on Aug. 24, borrowers are eligible for forgiveness of up to $10,000 in federally owned student debt if they have an annual income under $125,000. Pell Grant recipients are eligible for $20,000 in forgiveness.
The DOE said Thursday that those who have already applied for consolidated loan forgiveness by Sept. 29 would still receive it, buy debt relief for those loans will no longer be available.
“As of Sept. 29, 2022, borrowers with federal student loans not held by ED cannot obtain one-time debt relief by consolidating those loans into Direct Loans,” the DOE said in an update on its website.
“Borrowers with [Federal Family Education Loan] FFEL Program loans and Perkins Loans not held by ED who have applied to consolidate into the Direct Loan program prior to Sept. 29, 2022, are eligible for one-time debt relief through the Direct Loan program.”
“Our goal is to provide relief to as many eligible borrowers as quickly and easily as possible, and this will allow us to achieve that goal while we continue to explore additional legally available options to provide relief to borrowers with privately owned FFEL loans and Perkins loans, including whether FFEL borrowers could receive one-time debt relief without needing to consolidate,” an Education Department spokesperson told Politico in a statement.
In their lawsuit, the six attorneys general claimed they would face economic hardship if loans owned by private lenders were forgiven. Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson said his state’s pension fund is partly invested in securities backed by guaranteed federal loans. Others argued that the entire program would negatively impact their states’ economies.
The Department of Education said on its website it is “assessing whether there are alternative pathways to provide relief to borrowers with federal student loans not held by ED, including FFEL Program loans and Perkins Loans, and is discussing this with private lenders.”
Biden invoked emergency powers to authorize the loan forgiveness following a campaign by progressive Democrats — saying the COVID-19 pandemic meant he had a right to waive the debt. The administration has used a post-9/11 law meant to help members of the military as legal justification to reduce or erase student loan debt during a national emergency.
Republicans have argued in their suit that the administration is misinterpreting the law because, in part, the pandemic is no longer a national emergency, as Biden claimed in a accurate “60 Minutes” interview.
With Post wires