Every sexual assault allegation is a tragedy. Yet when college administrators ignore due process and mishandle serious allegations, these tragedies can quickly become catastrophes.
As it stands, it seems we have exactly that, a catastrophe, on the hands of Purdue University administrators. Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett, leading a unanimous, all-woman panel of judges, recently suggested that the university’s sexual assault procedures are rife with amateurism and unfairness.
National Review writer David French summarizes the motion:
According to the facts of the case, a woman, “Jane Doe,” accused a man, “John Doe,” of groping her while she was sleeping. The campus Title IX coordinator concluded that John was guilty of sexual assault despite not presenting to him evidence against him nor allowing John to present evidence to the contrary. Jane’s presentation of her side of the story was not given by her, but by a women’s group on her behalf, and he was not allowed to cross-examine her. The Title IX coordinator later issued a statement holding John guilty of sexual assault and suspending him from school for a year, causing him to lose his scholarship.
The text of the opinion itself is fascinating. Judge Barrett pointed out that the plaintiff has standing to sue Purdue on both Title IX and 14th Amendment grounds, considering that he has presented evidence that “he was denied an educational benefit [his education] on the basis of his sex.” That is, there is evidence to suggest that campus administrators misapplied even “basic standards of fairness” to prosecute a sexual assault case against a man, because he is a man.
Judge Barrett wrote that “the case against [John] boiled down to a “he said/she said” — Purdue had to decide whether to believe John or Jane.” And they believed Jane, despite not giving more than a cursory reason for doing so.
According to Title IX, no university that receives federal funding, as Purdue does, can “discriminate on the basis of sex.” Although the federal statute was put into place at the height of the feminist movement, it also protects men who face discrimination in fields where sexism against men is also rife. Judge Barrett concludes that there is a legitimate case to be made that John faced discrimination based on his sex.
Judge Barrett made the right decision to admonish Purdue’s campus administrators for their disgraceful treatment of John Doe. Although campuses (at least, currently) have the right to adjudicate sexual assault cases, ignoring the rights of due process is certainly grounds for removal of their authority.
There is a case to be made that college campuses are entirely unworthy to adjudicate sexual assault cases, with bias run rampant and having real consequences on the lives of men and women affected by their prejudices. Sometimes the bias is ideological, such as the anti-male bias exhibited by Purdue. Sometimes the bias is institutional, such as a college’s propensity to protect its star athletes from rape allegations.
I wouldn’t necessarily go as far as to strip college campuses of all authority on this matter, because I also understand that the current criminal justice system is not perfect, either. Less than 3% of reported rapes ever result in felony convictions. But if college campuses are going to adjudicate a student’s future, they better have a thorough, transparent, and fair process. That, Purdue did not have.
Due process demands that the accused see the evidence against him, that he is allowed to marshal witnesses, and the they be treated as “innocent until proven guilty.” The latter proposition has come under attack recently, with President Barack Obama’s Title IX guidance attempting to tie federal funding to colleges adopting a lesser “preponderance of evidence” standard, rather than that of “clear and convincing,” to convict students accused of sexual assault.
In any case, if John Doe’s case eventually is ruled in his favor, then Purdue University should face substantial consequences for their misguided and amateurish behavior.
Kenny Xu (@kennymxu) is a student at Davidson College and a contributor to Red Alert Politics.
