Category: Campus

PR: Judge Issues Scathing Decision Against Brandeis U.; Ruling is Latest in String of Cases Favoring Due Process

Post author By saveadmin
Post date April 5, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Judge Issues Scathing Decision Against Brandeis U.; Ruling is Latest in String of Cases Favoring Due Process

WASHINGTON / April 5, 2016 – The Massachusetts District Court has issued a strongly worded decision, ruling in favor of a student accused of sexual misconduct. The case is the most recent is a series of legal rulings supporting the need for stronger due process measures in campus sexual misconduct cases.

The case involved a same-sex relationship between two male students attending Brandeis University in Massachusetts. Following a 21-month long romantic relationship, John Doe was accused of “numerous inappropriate nonconsensual sexual interactions.” (1) The college proceeding led to a disciplinary warning and permanent notation in his educational record stating Doe had committed “serious sexual transgressions.” Doe filed a lawsuit alleging breach of contract, defamation, and other violations.

Writing on behalf of the District Court, Judge Dennis Saylor highlighted the basic unfairness of the University engaging an experienced attorney, while it expected “a student, approximately 21 years old, with no legal training or background, to defend himself, alone.”

The Court chided the university for its description of the accuser as a “victim,” noting, “Whether someone is a ‘victim’ is a conclusion to be reached at the end of a fair process, not an assumption to be made at the beginning.”

Judge Saylor was especially critical of the university investigator’s finding that Doe had violated the university’s affirmative consent policy because “it is absurd to suggest that it makes no difference whatsoever whether the other party is a total stranger or a long-term partner in an apparently happy relationship.”

The judge also questioned the University’s use of a preponderance of evidence standard of proof, which he viewed “as part of an effort to tilt the playing field against accused students, which is particularly troublesome in light of the elimination of other basic rights of the accused.” The District Court concluded, “Brandeis appears to have substantially impaired, if not eliminated, an accused student’s right to a fair and impartial process.”

The Brandeis decision is the most recent in a series of rulings that favor stronger due process protections for accused students at Appalachian State University, Brown University, University of California-Davis, University of California-San Diego, Cornell University, George Mason University, University of Michigan, Middlebury College, Pennsylvania State University, Salisbury University, University of Southern California, University of Tennessee-Chattanooga, and Washington and Lee University. (2)

(1) https://kcjohnson.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/brandeis-decision.pdf

(2) http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/court-decisions/

SAVE is working for evidence-based, constitutionally sound solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

PR: Affirmative Consent for Sex Gets ‘Thumbs-Down’ from Lawmakers, Legal Defense Group, and Harvard Professors

Post author By saveadmin
Post date March 28, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Email: glauterio@saveservices.org

Affirmative Consent for Sex Gets ‘Thumbs-Down’ from Lawmakers, Legal Defense Group, and Harvard Professors

WASHINGTON / March 28, 2016 – Polices designed to require explicit and ongoing agreement, often referred to as “affirmative consent,” experienced three setbacks during the past week. These developments signal broader concerns about the effectiveness, workability, and constitutionality of these policies, sometimes referred to as “yes means yes.”

Last Monday, members of the Maryland House Judiciary Committee declined to take a vote on HB 1142, a bill that would have required students at all Maryland colleges to give their “ongoing,” “clear, unambiguous, knowing, informed, and voluntary” agreement before engaging in sexual activities. Monday was the deadline for Maryland Delegates to approve a bill in order for it to advance to the Senate. Since no vote was taken, the affirmative consent bill is now considered “dead.” (1)

On March 22, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) released a position paper on a proposed rewrite of criminal sexual assault laws. The Preliminary Draft, currently being considered by the American Law Institute (ALI), would make the absence of affirmative consent a key element in determining whether a sexual offense had occurred. (2)

The NACDL document takes sharp issue with the ALI proposal, saying the proposed affirmative consent standard would “shift the burden of proof to the accused,” a change the NACDL views as unconstitutional. The Preliminary Draft, according to the NACDL, would “use the bludgeon of criminal sanctions to impose the new and yet untested concept of ‘affirmative consent’ upon society.”

Highlighting the difficulty of laying out a precise definition of affirmative consent, the NACDL notes, “No person should face prosecution, conviction and imprisonment based upon a vague and ambiguous law.” The NACDL concludes, “In a utopian society, transparent and free flowing communication about sexual activity would be a beneficial goal, but we are hardly a utopian society.”

Thirdly, Harvard University professors Jacob Gersen and Jeannie Suk released a scholarly article titled The Sex Bureaucracy. The paper posits that ever-expanding definitions of affirmative consent have led to the current untenable situation in which “conduct classified as illegal by the sex bureaucracy…plausibly covers almost all sex students are having today.” (3)

More information about affirmative consent is available on the SAVE website. (4)

(1) http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?stab=01&pid=billpage&tab=subject3&ys=2016rs&id=HB1142

(2) http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/NACDL-Comments-Draft-6-MPC-Sexual-Assault.pdf

(3) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2750143

(4) http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/affirmative-consent/

SAVE is working for evidence-based, constitutionally sound solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault

PR: Lawmakers Double-Down on Campus Due Process Abuses

Post author By saveadmin
Post date March 14, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: glauterio@saveservices.org

Lawmakers Double-Down on Campus Due Process Abuses

WASHINGTON / March 14, 2016 – In an effort to restore due process rights on campuses, state and federal lawmakers have taken determined steps in recent weeks to press college administrators and a federal oversight agency to uphold constitutionally based rights for students accused of sexual assault.

In the most dramatic development, Georgia Rep. Earl Ehrhart, chairman of the House appropriations committee, disapproved a $47 million funding request for Georgia Tech University over due process concerns for accused students.

Ehrhart then called out the Georgia Tech administrators. “The president and the administration are just clueless when it comes to due process on that campus and protecting all those kids. If I have to talk to another brokenhearted mother about their fine son where any allegation is a conviction and they toss these kids out of school after three and a half years, sometimes just before graduation, it’s just tragic,” Ehrhart charged (1).

At the federal level, criticisms were voiced during the course of two hearings in which Department of Education secretary-designate John King provided testimony.

At an Appropriations Committee hearing this past Thursday, Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee repeatedly confronted King with the fact that his department was threatening colleges with loss of federal funding if they did not comply with a 2011 “guidance” document (2).

During a previous hearing of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Rep. Virginia Foxx of North Carolina voiced concerns that the Department of Education has issued sexual assault directives with “potential negative impact on students and institutions.” She then requested that King provide written answers to nine questions about the department’s policy-making procedures (3).

On March 4, James Lankford of Oklahoma, chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, sent a strongly worded letter to the John King. The letter charged, “OCR’s silence on important due process considerations, coupled with the requirement of a lower standard of proof, indisputably tips the playing field against the accused, making the disciplinary process anything but ‘equitable.’” (4)

More information about executive over-reach by the federal Office for Civil Rights can be found on the SAVE website (5).

(1) http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/03/07/powerful-state-lawmaker-calls-for-georgia-tech-presidents-ouster/

(2) http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/senator-grills-acting-education-secretary-over-agency-overreach/article/2585472#.VuIfEXFPqD0.facebook

(3) http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/gop-congresswoman-questions-ed.-dept.-nominee-on-campus-sexual-assault/article/2584078

(4) https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=A56B7CAF8A43C485!16667&authkey=!AA5bfF-DWgQ-dZg&ithint=file%2cpdf

(5) http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/ocr/

SAVE is working for evidence-based, constitutionally sound solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus Due Process Sexual Assault

PR: Free Speech and Due Process Violations on Campus Give Rise to Budget Cutbacks, Costly Lawsuits

Post author By saveadmin
Post date March 1, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Email: glauterio@saveservices.org

Free Speech and Due Process Violations on Campus Give Rise to Budget Cutbacks, Costly Lawsuits

WASHINGTON / March 1, 2016 – A growing number of budget cutbacks and lawsuits across the nation reveals colleges that fail to respect free speech and due process rights may incur substantial financial liabilities. SAVE urges administrators and lawmakers to work cooperatively to restore the constitutionally based rights of students and faculty members on campus.

Regarding free speech, state lawmakers in Missouri recently announced they plan to reduce funding for the University of Missouri by $8 million. State House and Senate members singled out the actions of professor Melissa Click who was recorded interfering with students’ exercise of free speech rights (1).

University of Missouri trustees were also informed that the university system expects to lose $20-25 million in tuition revenues this year. Last month Standard & Poor’s lowered the system’s credit rating, citing a severe drop in new student enrollments (2).

Last July Valdosta State University in Georgia settled a First Amendment lawsuit, agreeing to pay $900,000 to former student Hayden Barnes who had been expelled due to his protests over planned construction of two parking garages (3).

Due process violations are proving to be costly, as well.

In Georgia, Rep. Earl Ehrhart warned Georgia Tech president GP Peterson on January 26 that he wouldn’t consider Tech’s budget request until the college adopted “simple, basic due process protections.” The following week, Georgia Tech withdrew its request for state bond funds for building renovations (4).

Lawsuits filed by students accused of or expelled on allegations of sexual assault have become more prevalent. At the University of Montana, administrators just agreed to pay $245,000 to former quarterback Jordan Johnson for the college’s “misconduct” in investigating a 2012 rape allegation (5).

Last week the Rhode Island District Court refused to dismiss a complaint filed by a male student who had been suspended from Brown University, citing breach of contract and a pattern of sex discrimination against male students (6).

Last month two men announced they were suing the University of Texas to prevent sanctions from being imposed on them. They charged the school is using them as scapegoats to build a reputation for being tough on sexual assault (7).

Over 100 due process lawsuits have been filed against colleges and universities across the country (8).

(1) http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/um-system-could-see-m-cut-under-mo-house-s/article_14d95137-311b-5d27-ade9-d9a5275c9768.html

(2) http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/state_news/university-of-missouri-system-s-credit-outlook-is-lowered/article_3d6e872a-10b8-5285-b568-62cdb5afd4f9.html

(3) http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local-education/valdosta-state-to-pay-900k-to-settle-students-civi/nm5sy/

(4) http://www.news.gatech.edu/2016/02/04/tech-withdraws-library-budget-request

(5) http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/montana-to-pay-ex-qb-dollar245k-over-rape-investigation/ar-BBpB2l4?ocid=st

(6) http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Doe-v.-Brown-University-2016.pdf

(7) http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/crime-law/men-accuse-ut-of-unfairly-punishing-them-for-sex-a/nqQcf/

(8) https://boysmeneducation.knackhq.com/due-process-lawsuits

SAVE is working for evidence-based, constitutionally sound solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus Free Speech Sexual Assault

PR: Lawmakers Push Back to Restore Free Speech and Due Process on Campus

Post author By saveadmin
Post date February 16, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Email: glauterio@saveservices.org

Lawmakers Push Back to Restore Free Speech and Due Process on Campus

WASHINGTON / February 16, 2016 – In the face of continuing pressures by campus activists, lawmakers across the country are taking steps to restore constitutionally based rights to free speech and due process. SAVE applauds these efforts to bring democratic ideals back to college campuses.

Regarding free speech, Arizona State Rep. Anthony Kern introduced a bill last week that would prohibit colleges from designating any area of campus as a free speech zone (1). In Missouri, Rep. Dean Dohrman introduced a bill last month that would require students to take a class on free speech in order to graduate (2).

Last summer the U.S. House of Representatives convened a hearing on First Amendment Protections on Public College and University Campuses (3). In January the National Association of Scholars issued a wide-ranging statement on intellectual freedom and free speech (4).

Lawmakers have expressed concerns about the lack of due process in sexual assault cases, as well.

On January 26, Georgia Rep. Earl Ehrhart, chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee on Higher Education, held a hearing that probed the lack of due process on campuses. Ehrhart warned he wouldn’t talk to college presidents about budget requests until they adopt “simple, basic due process protections.” (5)

Lack of legal representation is another due process shortcoming, and right-to-counsel laws for students accused of sexual assault have now been enacted in North Carolina, Arkansas, and North Dakota (6).

Nationally, two senators have voiced concerns about deficiencies in due process protections.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has highlighted the problem of false allegations: “One need only review recent news reports to know that false allegations do, in fact, happen. Certainly, we should make additional efforts to protect due process on campus.” (7)

Referring to the proposed Campus Accountability and Safety Act, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) commented, “I do believe you do need, for the accused, you need to maintain due process rights.… I think this part of the legislation will probably require some additional review.”

Last Tuesday Milo Yiannopoulos spoke at Rutgers University-New Brunswick about the need for free speech on campus. In response, protesters threw blood-colored paint on themselves, vandalized the building where Yiannopoulos spoke, and repeatedly interrupted his speech (8).

SAVE is working for evidence-based, constitutionally sound solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus Due Process Sexual Assault

Law Professors, Lawmakers, and Others Strengthen Calls for Due Process in Campus Sex Cases

Post author By saveadmin
Post date January 25, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Law Professors, Lawmakers, and Others Strengthen Calls for Due Process in Campus Sex Cases

WASHINGTON / January 25, 2016 – In recent weeks, numerous law professors, lawmakers, and others have issued statements calling for colleges to restore due process in the adjudication of sexual assault cases. These statements reveal a dramatic shift in the focus of the ongoing debate on campus sexual assault.

During a January 8 panel on “Grappling with Campus Rape” held at the American Association of Law Schools annual conference, several panelists were sharply critical of the current state of affairs. “’Rights’ is a generous description of what these schools gave the accused,” charged University of Miami law professor Tamara Rice Lave. http://reason.com/blog/2016/01/14/law-professors-against-title-ix-faculty

Two weeks later, over 80 members of the American Law Institute signed a letter deploring a proposed model penal code because the draft law would engender “expansive criminalization” of sexual assault. http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2016/01/more-concerns-expressed-about-alis-affirmative-consent-project-by-ali-members.html

Presidential candidates have expressed reservations about the proper handling of campus sex cases, as well.

On January 11, Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders called for the referral of campus sexual assault cases to the criminal justice system, which embodies an array of due process protections. http://reason.com/blog/2016/01/13/bernie-sanders-said-something-sane-about

Republican candidate Marco Rubio recently issued a statement noting that false allegations of sexual assault “can destroy lives….Certainly, we should make additional efforts to protect due process on campus.” https://marcorubio.com/news/marco-rubio-campus-sexual-assault-bill-due-process/

State lawmakers are calling for a renewed focus on due process, as well.

In California, governor Jerry Brown vetoed a bill last fall that would have established a mandatory minimum punishment for students found responsible of rape or sexual assault. “College campuses must deal with sexual assault fairly and with clear standards of process,” Brown announced. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/california-college-sexual-assault-punishment_561b184de4b0dbb8000f020f

Referring to a series of alleged due process abuses at Georgia Tech, Rep. Earl Ehrhart recently declared, “I cannot in good conscience continue to fund Georgia Tech at the level that it requests without some assurance to parents that there will be due process for their children.” http://blog.simplejustice.us/2016/01/17/crazy-campus-consent-conundrum- collapses/

Last week a federal court in Kentucky ruled that a campus sexual assault hearing should be regarded as a “proceeding…akin to a criminal prosecution,” and held that states should ensure that adjudicatory procedures are fair. https://www.thefire.org/opinion-and-order-in-doe-v-hazard-no-515-cv-00300-e-d-ky/

The Independent Women’s Forum just released a policy paper, Title IX and Freedom of Speech on College Campuses, which deplores the fact that colleges that adhere to “basic concepts of due process and innocence until proven guilty” could be found to be in violation of the federal Title lX sex discrimination law. http://pdf.iwf.org/PolicyFocus16_Jan_p3.pdf

In January, over 60 editorials were published that enumerated broad concerns over the lack of due process on campus: http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/editorials/2016-2/ On January 17, for example, the Editorial Board of the Oklahoman noted that the processes used to handle sex allegations on college campuses “increasingly resemble kangaroo courts.” http://newsok.com/article/5472807?utm_source=MobileNewsOK.com&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=ShareBar-Facebook

Campus

PR: SAVE Denounces Attempt to Muzzle Harvard U. Professors

Post author By saveadmin
Post date December 15, 2015

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

SAVE Denounces Attempt to Muzzle Harvard U. Professors, Calls on Office for Civil Rights to Revamp Sexual Harassment Policy

WASHINGTON / December 15, 2015 – SAVE is denouncing efforts of producers of a controversial film who are attempting to prevent 19 Harvard Law School professors from engaging in scholarly criticism. The professors’ analysis was featured in a November 19, 2015 statement chastising the movie, The Hunting Ground, for providing an “unfair and misleading portrayal” of an alleged incident of campus sexual assault (1).

In response, filmmakers Kirby Dick and Amy Ziering published a statement in the Harvard Crimson accusing the Harvard professors of creating a “hostile climate at Harvard Law.”

An allegation of causing a hostile climate could be considered grounds for investigating and disciplining the professors. According to a high-level Harvard administrator, several persons have already inquired about the possibility of a formal investigation (2).

The Free Speech Guidelines of the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences say, “Free speech is uniquely important to the University because we are a community committed to reason and rational discourse. Free interchange of ideas is vital for our primary function of discovering and disseminating ideas through research, teaching, and learning.” (3)

But the Harvard Free Speech Guidelines appear to conflict with recent directives from the federal Office for Civil Rights (OCR) that define campus sexual harassment as “any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.” A recent Letter signed by 15 professors criticized the OCR policies for causing an “alarming erosion of free speech and due process on college campuses.” For this reason, SAVE has called on Congress to rein in the federal Office for Civil Rights (4).

The Hunting Ground has been criticized in over 30 editorials for containing numerous factual errors and promoting an over-wrought “rape-culture” narrative (5). Editorialist Robbie Soave has commented that the movie co-producers apparently “believe that their work of propaganda should be immune from criticism.” (6)

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is working to protect free speech on campus and promote effective solutions to sexual assault: http://www.saveservices.org/

Campus

PR: Lawmakers Must Work to Stop Lawless Conduct on Campus

Post author By saveadmin
Post date December 1, 2015

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Email: info@saveservices.org

Lawmakers Must Work to Stop Lawless Conduct on Campus

WASHINGTON / December 1, 2015 – After a month of an increasing level of death threats, physical assaults, and intimidation tactics, SAVE is calling on lawmakers to take the lead to assure civil conduct, free speech, and due process on campus.

This past weekend, a death threat was issued against University of Chicago students: “At 10 a.m. on Monday mourning I am going to the campus quad of the University of Chicago. I will be armed with a M-4 Carbine and 2 Desert Eagles all fully loaded. I will execute aproximately 16 white male students and or staff.” On Monday, Jabari Dean, 21 was arrested as the prime suspect in the case.

Physical assaults against students have been reported at the University of Missouri and elsewhere. At Dartmouth College, protesters pinned a woman to the wall while calling her a “filthy white b*tch.” At Occidental College, 400 students took over the school’s administrative building. At Towson University in Maryland, students occupied the president’s office until he agreed to institute mandatory campus “cultural competency” briefings.

A majority of colleges and universities across the country unlawfully deny students their free speech rights, often restricting such expressions to “Free Speech Zones.” These are a few examples

— The University of California has developed a list of verbal “microaggressions” that students and faculty must avoid lest they engage in behavior deemed to be racist.

— The words “American,” “illegal alien,” and “fathering” are deemed problematic by the University of New Hampshire’s Bias-Free Language Guide.

— At Washington State, a teacher of Women & Popular Culture threatened to fail any student who used “oppressive” expressions that refer to “women/men as females or males.

In 2011 the U.S. Department of Education issued a landmark sexual assault regulation. The regulation mandated that all allegations of felony sexual assaults be referred to campus sex tribunals and curtailed the due process rights of the accused. The Department did not seek prior public review and comment, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

As a result, dozens of lawsuits have been filed against colleges alleging unlawful violations of due process. Recently Georgia Tech was sued for expelling a student for sexual misconduct based on the recommendation of a single administrator with a “proven history of bias,” according to the student’s attorney.

“State lawmakers should be holding hearings, issuing resolutions, and enacting legislation to restore order on campus,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “Colleges should be exemplars of peaceful protest and the rule of law.”

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is working to protect free speech on campus and promote effective solutions to sexual assault: http://www.saveservices.org/

Campus Sexual Assault

PR: Dept. of Education Sexual Assault Program Falls into Disarray; SAVE Calls on Congress to Take Action

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 7, 2015

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Email: info@saveservices.org

Dept. of Education Sexual Assault Program Falls into Disarray; SAVE Calls on Congress to Take Action

WASHINGTON / October 7, 2015 – The Department of Education has long claimed that universities must comply with its campus sexual assault policies or risk loss of federal funding. But in testimony to the Senate Homeland Security Committee, two Department of Education officials recently admitted that its 2011 Dear Colleague Letter is non-binding guidance that does not hold force of law: https://www.thefire.org/second-department-of-education-official-in-eight-days-tells-congress-guidance-is-not-binding/

This admission portends the necessity of a major overhaul of Department of Education’s sexual assault policies and practices:

The Education Department will need to rewrite existing guidance documents, such as its 2014 Questions and Answers on Title IX and Sexual Violence, to conform to the altered legal status of the Dear Colleague Letter, often referred to as the “DCL.”

The legal validity of settlement agreements with dozens of universities, which were based on the DCL “requirements,” is now called into question.

The Department of Education must decide whether to suspend or terminate ongoing investigations at over 100 universities.

In addition, universities across the nation will need to consider revamping their sexual assault policies, especially in light of the growing number of lawsuits by expelled students alleging the university removed their constitutionally protected due process rights.

In direct violation of legal requirements, the Dear Colleague Letter was published without prior public review and comment. Given the long-standing pattern of improper and unlawful Department of Education actions in this area, SAVE is calling on Congress to assert its full oversight and legislative authorities.

“For over four years, a rogue Department of Education has strong-armed schools with the threat of removing their federal funding,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “These practices amount to nothing less than illegal bureaucratic extortion.”

The DCL has become a lightning-rod for legal controversy. Last October, 28 Harvard law school faculty members published an open letter expressing “strong objections” to a new Harvard sexual assault policy. Hundreds of editorials have criticized the Dept. of Education letter and resulting campus policies: http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/editorials/2015-2/

Campus Sexual Assault

PR: Survey Labeled Students as Sex Offenders for Violating Policy that Didn’t Exist

Post author By saveadmin
Post date September 23, 2015

Contact: Gina Lauterio

Email: info@saveservices.org

Survey Labeled Students as Sex Offenders for Violating Policy that Didn’t Exist:

SAVE Calls on AAU to Retract Flawed Campus Study

WASHINGTON / September 23, 2015 – A widely publicized survey on campus sexual assault by the Association of American Universities (AAU) classified male students as violators of affirmative consent policies, even when such policies were not in existence on the campus at the time the survey was conducted. SAVE is calling for AAU to retract the survey and recalculate its findings.

On September 21, the AAU released its Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct, which was conducted at 27 colleges around the nation. The survey reported that 23.1% of female undergraduates experience sexual assault or sexual misconduct sometime during their college careers.

The survey defined “sexual misconduct” to include failure to obtain affirmative consent. But affirmative consent is a controversial, possibly unconstitutional policy, and most colleges had not implemented the policy when AAU fielded the survey in April 2015.

An internet search of the terms “affirmative consent,” “student handbook,” and the name of each university reveals that at the time the AAU survey was conducted:

— For 15 out of the 27 colleges, no affirmative consent policy was in place when the survey was conducted

— For 9 colleges, an affirmative consent policy is currently in place, but the date of implementation is unknown

— For 3 colleges, affirmative consent policy was known to be in place when the AAU survey was carried out

The AAU report makes the claim that 11.4% of undergraduate females were “victimized” by the absence of affirmative consent. But for at least 15 out of the 27 colleges, no affirmative consent policy was in place. Therefore, absence of affirmative consent cannot be considered to represent sexual misconduct at these institutions, and the 23.1% female victimization figure is substantially over-stated

“Only in an Orwellian world would students be smeared as sex offenders for violating a policy that didn’t even exist,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “The Association of American Universities needs to retract the survey and recalculate its findings based on whether an affirmative consent policy was in place when the survey was conducted.”

The AAU survey has been criticized for its low response rate, its failure to adequately explain “incapacitation” to respondents, and other reasons. A listing of the status of the affirmative consent policies for the 27 colleges can be seen here: http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/aau-survey/

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is working to promote effective solutions to campus sexual assault: http://www.saveservices.org/