"It’s insane, it’s so deeply problematic," said Rachael Denhollander, a lawyer, and the first woman to publicly accuse Nassar of sexual abuse, who advises institutions on issues of sexual violence.

"The fact that general counsel was editing the reports, explicitly to reduce liability ... I am livid," said Denhollader, whose report was among those edited.

Evidence of the meddling is coming to light amid the release of thousands of long-privileged documents related to MSU’s handling of its disgraced former sports doctor.

The university claims it's ended the interference in the years since the Nassar scandal, but the results of a recent outside review suggest otherwise.

MSU edited reports

The cases in question came at an odd moment for MSU’s investigators. As hundreds of survivors were publicly coming forward to accuse Nassar of sexual abuse, MSU was investigating numerous cases — even that happened years before — to comply with its requirements under Title IX.

At the same time, the university was strategizing for a looming barrage of civil lawsuits, with survivors arguing the university had allowed Nassar’s abuse to go on for so long.

In April 2017, Title IX investigator Lin-Chi Wang sent the final reports in multiple cases to the general counsel’s office for review.

Numerous edits were made to the various cases. In one case, the lawyers made their intentions explicit.

"I made a few more edits, which are targeted towards phrasing/issues that are important from our broader litigation defense strategy," wrote Kristine Zayko, then MSU’s deputy general counsel.

In another case, Zayko described edits to a report that changed the status of certain allegations against Nassar.

Zayko, who was promoted to acting general counsel then left MSU in 2018, declined to comment.

Also involved in editing the cases: Brian Quinn, then a low-level MSU attorney who now serves as the university’s general counsel.

The university claims that interference stopped years ago. In a statement, MSU spokesperson Emily Guerrant said the practice ended after it was criticized in a 2019 investigation by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.

But, the findings of a 2023 outside review suggest the problem has continued.

After mandatory-reporting failures prompted the removal of MSU’s business dean, the board hired law firm Quinn Emanuel to investigate the circumstances surrounding the case. In its report, the firm noted that the general counsel’s office asked the Title IX office to reopen an investigation into sexual harassment by a professor. The general counsel’s office also meddled in a decision to not amend the formal complaint in the case, the firm found.

That interference was "at odds with the independent authority (the Title IX office) was given," the firm wrote.

'Title IX is supposed to operate independently'

There is a way for the general counsel to be involved in Title IX reports appropriately, but it’s a delicate balance, said Jody Shipper, managing director of Grand River Solutions, a Title IX consulting firm.

University lawyers can sometimes offer helpful guidance about phrasing, being a second set of eyes focused on "necessary clarity," she said. But, it is concerning if the general counsel’s office is "stepping out of that role and becoming a decision-maker," changing the outcome of a case or changing the weight of certain evidence.

Because privilege protects those discussions, the public will likely never know if MSU’s lawyers are continuing to improperly interfere, said Denhollander, the survivor and attorney whose case was among those edited.

"Just because there isn’t the same evidence of them doing so in other situations, doesn’t mean that’s not what they’re looking for," she said.

Even if MSU’s lawyers don’t directly interfere in every case, the effect could still be felt, Denhollander said. Investigators who have faced similar notes may habitually tailor their findings and phrasing to limit MSU’s future liability, she said.

That raises questions about the findings of all of the university’s high profile cases, Denhollander said, including the recent report on sexual harassment by ex-football coach Mel Tucker.

"It’s so wildly inappropriate," she said. "The general counsel’s duty is to the university. Title IX is supposed to operate independently of that … It's a check and balance."

A broader issue, no perfect solution

Title IX attorney Laura Dunn said she has long suspected this sort of interference is a widespread issue at many colleges — but has never been able to prove it.

"I believe it’s commonly done, but not commonly exposed, because attorney-client privilege hides it," said Dunn, who works on matters of campus sexual assault as a lawyer, consultant and expert witness.

The problem, she said, is that colleges directly benefit from this sort of meddling and have no incentive to change it.

So, she believes the federal government needs to modify the rules colleges operate under to outlaw administrative intrusion into Title IX investigations.

"It inherently undermines the effectiveness of Title IX to have the (federal government) allow this," she said. "They should be saying, 'If you're going to be sued as a result of your own negligence, you can’t objectively decide a case.'"

The current politics of doing that, however, are complicated, she said.

Congress could open up the Title IX law itself, and modify it to require more independence for investigators of these cases. But, Dunn said there are concerns about making those changes "under this Supreme Court," which has become notorious in recent years for making conservative decisions in landmark cases.

The Department of Education could also issue guidance on Title IX that interprets the law in a way that requires further independence. But, that too could be rendered ineffective by the conservative court, Dunn said.

In June, the court greatly limited the power of federal agencies like the Department of Education, taking away much of their ability to definitively interpret the law as they see fit.

So, even if the Department of Education issued guidance outlawing the type of Title IX interference MSU engaged in, it would be hard to enforce and subject to legal challenges, Dunn said.

Administration Reporters Owen McCarthy and Theo Scheer contributed reporting.