Following a recent change to New York law, New York City’s independent schools are now required to adopt policies and procedures to protect students from bullying, both on and off-campus. On October 23, 2025, Governor Hochul enacted the Jack Reid Law. Through this landmark legislation, New York extended the anti-bullying and harassment protections that previously applied only to the City’s public schools, under the 2012 Dignity for All Students Act (“DASA”), to New York independent schools for the first time.
The Jack Reid Law
The Reid law provides that, “no student shall be subjected to harassment or bullying, including cyberbullying, by other students on school property or at a school function,” defining “school” to be any nonpublic elementary or secondary school. The Reid Law defines “harassment” and “bullying” broadly, to mean “the creation of a hostile environment by conduct or by threats, intimidation or abuse, including cyberbullying, that:
- has or would have the effect of unreasonably and substantially interfering with a student’s educational performance, opportunities or benefits, or mental, emotional or physical well-being;
- reasonably causes or would reasonably be expected to cause a student to fear for their physical safety;
- reasonably causes or would reasonably be expected to cause physical injury or emotional harm to a student; or
- occurs off school property and creates, or would foreseeably create, a risk of substantial disruption within the school environment, where it is foreseeable that the conduct, threats, intimidation or abuse might reach school property.”
“Cyberbullying” is defined as “harassment or bullying” that “occurs through any form of electronic communication.”
Notably, the Reid Law prohibits harassment and bullying not only when it occurs on-campus or at a school function, but also encompasses off-campus conduct, if that conduct could foreseeably disrupt the school environment.
The Reid Law also imposes reporting obligations on school employees. Specifically, school employees who witness bullying or harassment must orally notify the head of school (or principal) not later than one school day after witnessing such conduct and must file a written report not later than two days after making an oral report. Schools are required to “investigate promptly,” communicate their findings to the victim, and take “immediate steps” to ensure the conduct has stopped and prevent retaliation. It is important to note that even one incident of bullying and/or harassment, if sufficiently severe, triggers the school’s obligations under the Reid Law.
Litigation Risk
Like DASA, the Reid Law does not grant private parties an explicit right of action. Given its newness, there has been little opportunity for New York state or federal courts to determine whether a private right of action may be fairly implied. In deciding this issue, however, courts are likely to find precedent in the line of cases declining to imply a private right of action under DASA. There, courts have held that implying a private right of action is inconsistent with the legislative intent that the law be primarily preventative, as opposed to punitive, and reasoned that DASA should therefore be implemented in such a way that encourages schools to adopt strategies designed to prevent bullying rather than to provide an alternative remedial avenue for private plaintiffs.1 Given that the legislative intent behind the Reid Law echoes the intent behind DASA, courts may well reach the same conclusion with respect to the Reid Law.
Regardless of whether the courts ultimately imply a private right of action, schools have a duty, independent of the Reid Law, to adequately supervise students and may face reputational harm and significant liability for failing to exercise reasonable care based on facts known to the school about the parties involved.2 For example, as part of the school’s settlement with Jack Reid’s parents, the school was required to make a public statement admitting that they failed to adequately protect Jack from bullying, even though the school was aware that Jack was being harassed by other students. The financial details of the Reid settlement were not made public, but in 2023, a New Jersey school district paid $9.1 million to settle a similar lawsuit brought by the parents of a sixth grader who died by suicide based on the school district’s failure to adequately respond to the parent’s ongoing complaints of bullying.3
Five Best Practices in a Bullying Investigation
In addition to reviewing and updating anti-bullying and harassment policies to comply with the Reid Law, schools should adopt the following best practices when investigating reports of bullying and harassment:
-
First, develop a clear action plan. At a minimum, the plan should identify the investigation team, including whether the head of school, principal, or other designee will oversee the investigation. The plan should also detail a strategy for collecting and preserving the relevant documents, including any text messages and social media. Finally, the plan should consider whether to seek the assistance of outside counsel. For example, it may be advisable to seek advice from counsel where there is a significant risk of litigation or where there is otherwise heightened sensitivity given the nature of the allegations or individuals involved.
-
Second, clearly define the scope of the investigation. Under the Reid Law, after concluding the investigation, the school must report back to the victim and develop a plan to prevent further bullying or related retaliation. Accordingly, the investigative scope will be primarily defined by the conduct alleged. As the facts develop, however, maintaining a well-defined investigative scope will allow the investigation team to effectively assess whether it is necessary and in the best interests of all involved to expand the scope beyond the initial report.
-
Third, identify all relevant and applicable policies and laws. Depending on the nature of the allegations, local and state anti-discrimination and harassment laws may also be implicated. If the allegations are criminal in nature, it may also be necessary to refer the matter to law enforcement. Outside counsel can advise on the relevant legal considerations to ensure compliance with state, local, and federal laws.
-
Fourth, interview key witnesses. Identify key witnesses and, if possible, conduct interviews in person. Conducting the interview in person allows the investigator to better assess witness credibility and to more quickly develop a rapport, making it more likely that the witness will provide a candid report. Before the interview, prepare an interview outline to guide discussion. During the interview, ask the witness about any relevant documents or communications, including text messages, that might be important to review in preparing the investigative report.
-
Fifth, maintain confidentiality. In conducting an internal investigation, there are generally two types of confidentiality to consider. First, if the school retains outside counsel, any communications regarding the investigation are generally shielded from disclosure by attorney-client privilege so long as the parties involved treat these communications as confidential. Second, although internal communications among non-lawyers are not generally protected by privilege, any employees involved in the investigation and any witnesses interviewed should be advised to exercise discretion by keeping investigation details in strict confidence. To help preserve confidentiality, limit the number of interviews to those necessary to establish the relevant facts without unnecessarily expanding the circle of information.
Conclusion
A well planned and carefully executed investigation will not only be most effective in establishing the underlying facts, it can minimize the risk of retaliation. Every investigation presents a unique set of issues, but having a clear action plan will help ensure that the investigation is properly handled should allegations of bullying and harassment arise.
