District of Columbia
UDC law school hit with bias complaint from nonbinary student
Alleged victim sought protections from stalker on campus
A third-year student at the University of the District of Columbia’s David A. Clarke School of Law who self-identifies as a “non-binary, Black Femme” filed a discrimination complaint on Jan. 9 alleging that the school violated federal law by refusing to take action on campus to protect the student from domestic violence and stalking from a former boyfriend.
The student, D.C. resident Loreal Hawk, filed the complaint through their attorney before the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights. Among other things, it alleges that the law school refused over a period of close to three years to provide accommodations such as allowing virtual attendance of classes to help safeguard Hawk from repeated stalking and threats of domestic violence from the ex-boyfriend, who’s referred to in the complaint as the “respondent” and is not identified by name.
The complaint says Hawk is philosophically opposed to police involvement in this type of domestic situation and that under federal law, colleges are required to provide a reasonable accommodation to protect students from domestic violence and stalking without requiring them to report the threats to campus police or a municipal police department.
The complaint charges that the UDC law school’s intentional refusal to act in support of Hawk violates Title IX of the U.S. Education Amendments Act of 1972, which bans discrimination at schools based on sex and gender identity. It charges that the school’s lack of action also violates another federal statute known as the Clery Act, which requires schools and colleges to take reasonable steps to safeguard students from threats of sexual harassment and stalking, among other hostile actions.
The 37-page complaint further calls on the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights to investigate and impose civil penalties against UDC for violating the two laws and to order the school to take emergency action to protect Hawk from further threats by the respondent between now and the time Hawk is scheduled to graduate in May of this year.
The UDC Clarke School of Law did not immediately respond to a request by the Washington Blade for comment on the complaint and whether it disputes the allegations included in the complaint.
Jim Bradshaw, a spokesperson for the Department of Education, said the department’s Office of Civil Rights “does not acknowledge specific complaints until they have been evaluated and accepted for investigation.” Bradshaw added, “We’ll be in touch,” implying his office would respond to press inquiries about the Hawk complaint at the appropriate time.
Hawk’s complaint, which was little noticed at the time it was filed in early January, surfaced on Monday at a D.C. Council Committee of the Whole oversight hearing on UDC-related matters when both Hawk and Hawk’s attorney, Megan Challender, brought up the complaint and Hawk’s allegations against UDC in testimony during the virtual hearing.
D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large), who presided over the hearing, asked UDC President Ronald Mason, who also testified, to respond to the allegations made in Hawk’s complaint at a later time, but did not ask Mason to respond to the allegations at the Feb. 27 hearing.
The complaint says the respondent, who allegedly assaulted and continues to stalk Loreal Hawk, has no affiliation with the law school or UDC. It says he had been dating Hawk until Hawk attempted to end their relationship in October 2020, which it says prompted the respondent to physically assault Hawk, forcibly take Hawk’s car keys and drive Hawk against their will to Hawk’s apartment in D.C.
Once there, the complaint states, the respondent held Hawk as a prisoner in Hawk’s own apartment for a period of time until the law student persuaded the respondent to leave the apartment after being subjected to physical violence.
“When Mx. Hawk demanded that Respondent leave, Respondent lunged at Mx. Hawk, knocking Mx. Hawk to the ground,” according to the complaint. “Mx. Hawk was able to get free and lock themselves in the bathroom. Respondent tried to beat down the door, but eventually left,” the complaint says.
“After leaving, Respondent began repeatedly calling Mx. Hawk,” the complaint continues. “Between October 2020 and March 2021, Respondent directed a persistent course of conduct at Mx. Hawk that caused Mx. Hawk to reasonably fear for their own safety,” it says. “This included as many as 30 unwanted calls a day, text messages, and emails.” It says Hawk received many of the calls and text messages while on the UDC campus taking classes.
The complaint adds that, “Following over a year of relative respite from Respondent, Respondent’s course of conduct resumed on October 6, 2022, and continues to this day.”
It says UDC further violated the law by at one point informing Hawk that it could only take protective action if Hawk reported the threats to campus police or filed a report with D.C. police.
“Mx. Hawk does not feel comfortable reporting to the police,” the complaint states. “Mx. Hawk organizes in the police violence space and thus does not feel police will handle their situation in a way that would be adequate and best for their unique situation,” it says. “Further, Mx. Hawk is Black and nonbinary, two identities that experience high rates of disbelief by law enforcement and brutality at the hands of law enforcement,” the complaint says.
“Finally, Mx. Hawk fears possible escalation from Respondent if police were to become involved,” it says.
Hawk’s attorney, Megan Challender, an official with the legal services organization Network for Victim Recovery of DC, said she understands that some in the LGBTQ community might raise questions about her client’s concerns about dealing with D.C. police without knowing Hawk’s specific situation.
LGBTQ activists in D.C., including longtime transgender rights advocate Earline Budd, have pointed out that after many years of advocacy work by the LGBTQ community, D.C. police have put in place safeguards and police training programs to ensure supportive behavior and support for LGBTQ crime victims.
Activists, including Budd, point to the longstanding D.C. Police LGBT Liaison Unit, which provides services for LGBTQ crime victims and is called upon by other police units to assist in investigating crimes targeting LGBTQ people. Police officials have said many LGBTQ people also now serve openly as officers on the D.C. police force.
When asked if Hawk considered obtaining a D.C. Superior Court stay-away order to prohibit the respondent from engaging in stalking or harassing phone calls or contact with Hawk of any kind, which can be obtained without filing a police report, Challender said she could not provide that information because it would violate attorney-client privilege.
“Of course, we talked about options,” Challender told the Blade. “And to be clear, we wouldn’t expect an educational institution to act as a policing authority,” she said. “But there is a lot of stuff that could have been taken that was not offered and they were not really engaged with us on,” she said in referring to UDC law school officials.
Among the actions the university could have taken but did not, Challender said, is to allow Hawk to take some or all their classes virtually, which was the case for all students in 2020 during the peak of the COVID pandemic. Challender notes that the respondent in his phone calls and email and text messages to Hawk has made it clear he was surveilling the UDC campus and knew Hawk’s whereabouts, including the classrooms and building where Hawk’s classes were being held.
Another option UDC did not undertake was to issue its own no-contact order to the respondent, something most other schools routinely do for students being harassed, Challender said. She said her law office issued such a stay away order to the respondent, which the respondent ignored.
“Another option to consider would be providing Loreal with a parking spot in the garage underneath the building so that Loreal doesn’t have to park on the street and walk and experience harm on the street and instead can go directly into a secure building,” she said.
In their testimony before Monday’s D.C. Council hearing Hawk told how Hawk had high hopes and expectations of their role as law student at UDC
“Further, I was thrilled by the opportunity to attend my first Historically Black College or University, where I hoped to be nurtured and in community with BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and people of color) attorneys and advocates,” Hawk stated in their written testimony submitted to the D.C. Council. But all that changed after Hawk attempted to seek support and accommodations from the school in response to the domestic violence and stalking Hawk encountered from the respondent, Hawk says in their testimony.
“UDC Law’s response to my request for accommodations has been inadequate, endangering, or altogether absent,” Hawk told the D.C. Council hearing. “In the first iteration of this issue, UDC Law enacted a punitive measure, refused to notify me of Title IX and Clery Act accommodations, rescinded my scholarship, and failed to reinstate my scholarship once I performed the terms of our agreement,” their testimony states.
“I was repeatedly misgendered throughout the entire process and their actions indicated that I was being excluded, punished and ignored because of my intersectional identities as a non-binary, Black femme, and survivor of domestic violence,” Hawk told the Council hearing.

The Washington Blade will report the UDC School of Law’s official response and answer to the complaint as soon as it either decides to publicly release it or the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, where the complaint was filed, makes it part of the public record.
District of Columbia
‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge
A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10.
Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets.
Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers standing in front of the shop.
Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.
“I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.
“And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”
The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.
Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured.
Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.
“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”
The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.
Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom.
Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.
The dispute over the intricacies of the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.
Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.
DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.
“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.
Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.
Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident.
“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.”
“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.
“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.
District of Columbia
Trial begins for man charged with throwing sandwich at federal agent
Jury views video of incident that went viral on social media
Prosecutors showed jurors a video of Sean Charles Dunn throwing a sub sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the bustling intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10 of this year on the opening day of Dunn’s trial that has drawn national attention.
According to a knowledgeable source, Dunn threw the sandwich at the agent after shouting obscenities at him and other federal law enforcement officers who were stationed at that location after he was refused admission to the nearby gay bar Bunker for being too intoxicated.
Charging documents and reports by witnesses show that Dunn expressed outrage that the federal officers were stationed there and at other locations in D.C. under orders from President Donald Trump to help curtail crime in the city.
Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge, but the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.
“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” a criminal complaint states, “pointed his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”
The complaint adds, “Dunn continued his conduct for several minutes before crossing the street and continuing to yell obscenities at V-1. At approximately 11:06 p.m. Dunn approached V-1 and threw a sandwich at him, striking V-1 in the chest.”
The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.”
At the opening day of testimony at the trial on Tuesday, Nov. 4, V-1, who was identified as Customs and Border Patrol Agent Gregory Lairmore, testified as the first government witness. Also testifying was Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who said she was present at the scene and saw Dunn throw the sandwich at Lairmore.
The position taken by Dunn’s defense attorneys is outlined in a 24-page memorandum in support of a motion filed on Oct. 15 calling for the dismissal of the case, which was denied by U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols.
“This prosecution is a blatant abuse of power,” the defense memo states. “The federal government has chosen to bring a criminal case over conduct so minor it would be comical – were it not for the unmistakable retaliatory motive behind it and the resulting risk to Mr. Dunn.”
It adds, “Mr. Dunn tossed a sandwich at a fully armed, heavily protected Customs and Border Protection {CBP} officer. That act alone would never have drawn a federal charge. What did was the political speech that accompanied it.”
The trial was scheduled to resume at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, Nov. 5.
District of Columbia
D.C. mayor announces use of local funds for SNAP food aid
Md., Va. arrange for similar local replacement of federal money
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser announced on Oct. 30 that she has arranged for at least $129 million in local D.C funds to be used to support as many as 141,000 D.C. residents in need who depend on the federal food assistance programs known as SNAP and WIC whose funding will be cut off beginning Nov. 1 due to the federal shutdown.
SNAP, which stands for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and WIC, the Women, Infants, and Children Program, provide food related services for 10 million or more people in need nationwide.
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, and Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer also announced similar plans to provide emergency state funds to replace the federal funds cut off beginning Nov. 1 for the two food programs.
Similar to Bowser, Moore and Youngkin said their replacement funds at this time would only last for the month of November. Each said they were hopeful that Congress would end the shutdown before the end of November.
“We know that SNAP and WIC play a critical role in keeping thousands of Washingtonians and millions of Americans put food on the table each month,” Bowser said in a statement. “We were hopeful it wouldn’t come to this – and we will need the federal government to reopen as soon as possible – but for right now, we’re moving forward to ensure we take care of D.C. residents in November,” she said.
The mayor’s statement says about 85,000 D.C. households, consisting of 141,000 individuals, receive SNAP support each month, with an average monthly allocation of $314. It says more than 12,500 city residents in 8,300 households benefit from the WIC program.
A spokesperson for the D.C. Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether the city has an estimated count of how many LGBTQ residents receive support from the SNAP and SIC programs.
-
District of Columbia3 days ago‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
-
Sports3 days agoGay speedskater racing toward a more inclusive future in sports
-
Celebrity News5 days agoJonathan Bailey is People’s first openly gay ‘Sexiest Man Alive’
-
Michigan5 days agoFBI thwarts Halloween terror plot targeting Mich. LGBTQ bars
