Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Robin McDuff's avatar

Here is a wonderful, and horrifying, law review article that shows clearly what the "Dear Colleague" letter set in motion and why it had to be changed. DeVos' regulations are far better than what existed. I will vote for Biden, but he is completely wrong about this one - and should now have a clearer understanding of the issue. https://web.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/law-theory-workshop/files/the_sex_bureaucracy_21.pdf It clearly must not come back in the old form, if there is a change in regulation.

Expand full comment
sascha benjamin cohen's avatar

This is an important and provocative discussion, and one that is necessary. But it is disappointing to see the author ignore one of the key problems facing both Title IX and any correctives proposed for it: that, unlike other areas of sexual assault adjudication, Title IX issues are heard by the campus authorities themselves, who have biases and vested interests in the outcome of any investigative proceedings. By "balancing" out the rights of the accused, and here using the Supreme Court's comments on cross-examination as support, you ignore the challenges that are structurally in place in the nature of a self-governing campus community which by nature are preferential to the accused, rather than the accuser -- since the accused is in a sense the de facto representative of the institution and its practices, reputation, and public presence.

It would be nice to hear more about how a future Democratic administration might address those issues, and how the impetus to push back on many of the changes from DeVos and the current administration are driven by a larger goal, and perhaps suggest some rational approaches to correcting the underlying problems with a school trying to address what is inherently a criminal, not an educational, issue.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts