New Title IX Regulations Restore Due Process–But There’s a Battle Ahead

James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal ^ | May 15, 2019 | George Leef

[karpov]

In the latest case where a male student sued his college over the unfair procedures it used to expel him, Colgate University in New York will go to trial. So ruled federal district judge Frederick Scullin on April 30. In his opinion, the plaintiff student had presented sufficient evidence of bias against him for the case to proceed.

The case began in October 2016. At that time, Colgate, like all American colleges, was operating under the Title IX regulations instituted during the Obama administration. Those regulations, dictated through a mere “Dear Colleague” letter rather than formal administrative rulemaking, decreed that colleges must abide by a new set of rules when responding to complaints of sexual assault or harassment (which was very broadly defined).

Those rules dramatically changed the way such cases were handled by stacking the deck against accused students, almost always male.

The Colgate case was typical. As Judge Scullin observed, there was a strong odor of bias on the part of the school’s investigator against the defendant. Courts in many other Title IX cases have come to the same conclusion that fairness and due process of law were trampled upon by zealous administrators who were far more concerned with punishing accused students than in seeking the truth.

It is worth noting that many liberal civil libertarians denounced the blatant unfairness of the Obama administration’s Title IX regulations, including 28 members of the faculty of Harvard Law School, who sharply criticized the rules.

[marktwain]

How many mens’ lives have been ruined under these Soviet style proceedings? Hundreds? Thousands?

All to further Leftist power in the USA.

[PapaBear3625]

“Title IX” inquisitions need to be eliminated. If a woman feels that a man did something illegal to her, then go to the police. A student who is convicted in a court of law may be expelled.

[Wuli]

The change De Vos has made is good, but to me it does not go far enough.

My view is that schools have no business adjudicating guilt and innocence on any charges about sexual conduct for which the law or the courts in the states have legal remedies.

A complainant can file a charge with local police or prosecutors for the government jurisdiction in which the school is located. Those officials, not the school can investigate the case, beginning the legal process of adjudicating any claims.

If a charge is not covered by local law, but is still considered some form of harassment, the complainant can go to the courts for two remedies. The immediate remedy is the complainant can seek a restraining order against someone, presenting evidence for it, and accepting the courts action. More seriously the complainant can enter a civil suit against someone, and again accepting the court result of that suit.

After, and only after, any of those processes the school will have the LEGAL and COURT decided results of any complaints. The government rules should ONLY require that waiting for those legal processes is what schools must do, taking no action against anyone until those processes have completed. The additional rule must be that schools cannot make administrative decisions against students that are contradictory towards the results of legal proceedings by the local authorities or the courts.

I cannot accept colleges acting as a “law” authority on their own. They reside in legal government jurisdictions fully capable of adjudicating matters of sexual harassment. THAT is where the matters belong, and that is where a defendant will receive all their rights.

[WASCWatch]

Enjoyed reading your opinion. Right on the money.

Now that the Judge has ruled that the case will go to trial, Colgate will settle for a very big number.