Category: Innocence

To End ‘Kangaroo Courts,’ Lawmakers Need to Remove Qualified Immunity from Corrupt Title IX Officials

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date January 8, 2024

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

To End ‘Kangaroo Courts,’ Lawmakers Need to Remove Qualified Immunity from Corrupt Title IX Officials

WASHINGTON / January 9, 2024 – Recent incidents reveal that many campus Title IX offices are ignoring fundamental due process protections for the falsely accused, resulting in college disciplinary committees being dubbed “Kangaroo Courts.” Given that these biases are so egregious and likely intentional, lawmakers need to enact laws to remove qualified immunity from campus Title IX personnel.

These are three recent examples of egregious due process violations:

Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia: After he was sexually assaulted by a female resident, physician John Abraham reported the incident to his supervisor at the university. But inexplicably, his complaint was not forwarded to the Title IX office and never investigated (1). Abraham was forced from his faculty position before any investigation could be conducted.

In December, a jury decided in favor of Abraham, awarding him $11 million in compensation for financial losses and $4 million in punitive damages for the university’s “outrageous conduct.” (2)

University of Maryland, College Park: A UMD student recently sued the University of Maryland, accusing the institution of a biased disciplinary proceeding (3). The lead investigator in the case was Jamie Brennan, who had previously posted on her Facebook page a quote stating, “I think women are foolish to pretend they are equal to men, they are far superior and always have been.”

The man’s lawsuit notes, “Investigators are supposed to ‘identify discrepancies’ in the stories and ‘ask the hard questions.’…In this case there were several discrepancies for which there was no follow-up and certainly no ‘hard questions’… When asked to explain her conduct, Brennan retorted, ‘that was not something we sought to obtain.’” (4)

University of Tulsa, Oklahoma: Impartiality is the foundation of due process. But at the University of Tulsa, the Title IX coordinator made a video promising accusers that they “will be believed.” (5) A similar promise was not made to falsely accused students.

No surprise, a sex discrimination lawsuit alleged the same Title IX coordinator had restricted an accused student’s access to evidence and treated him as guilty throughout the process. In August, the case was remanded to the Tulsa County District Court for final resolution (6).

These three incidents are not the exception to the rule. An analysis of 175 lawsuits decided in favor of the falsely accused student concluded that in most cases, the judicial decisions were based on the fact that colleges were failing to observe the most fundamental notions of fairness, often so gross as to suggest that sex bias was the motivating factor (7).

Indeed, recent actions by the federal Department of Education that flout basic requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act have been denounced as a “contempt of court” and “contempt of law.” (8)

Given the continuing lack of good faith on the part of the Title IX personnel, lawmakers must consider the removal of qualified immunity. Qualified immunity is the legal doctrine that shields officials from personal accountability when they violate a citizen’s constitutional rights.

The drive to end qualified immunity for unscrupulous police officers now enjoys broad support, including from U.S. senator Mike Lee (9), Americans Against Qualified Immunity (10), and the National Police Accountability Project (11). An online petition, “End Qualified Immunity!” has garnered nearly 130,000 signatures (12).

It’s time to eliminate qualified immunity for corrupt Title IX officials and bring an end to the campus Kangaroo Courts.

Links:

Civil Rights Domestic Violence Due Process False Allegations Feminism Innocence Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

As False Allegations Spiral Out of Control, Feminist Groups Work to Give False Accusers a Free Pass

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date August 23, 2023

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

As False Allegations Spiral Out of Control, Feminist Groups Work to Give False Accusers a Free Pass

WASHINGTON / August 23, 2023 – Courtney Conover of Pennsylvania made a series of false accusations against Dr. James Amor and another person, claiming they had mishandled the complaints of victims of rape and sexual assault. Using her blog and social media account, Conover accused them of being “the devil,” a “human monster,” had been “aiding and abetting a pedophile for two decades,” and other outlandish claims.

The jury was so disturbed by the accusations that it found in favor of Dr. Amor and awarded $1.4 million in damages. This past Friday, U.S. District Court Judge John Gallagher upheld the jury finding, although he did reduce the damages (1).

False allegations represent a growing threat across the country. A 2020 YouGov survey found that 8% of Americans had been falsely accused of sexual assault, domestic violence, or child abuse (2). Three years later, that number had increased to 10% (3).

Unfortunately, feminist groups are working to give a free pass to false accusers, focusing on both the civil and criminal settings:

Civil: Feminists are seeking to confer absolute legal immunity on women who make accusations that are knowingly false. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that lawsuits for damages from defamatory claims reflect “our basic concept of the essential dignity and worth of every human being.” (4)

But that didn’t stop Legal Momentum (formerly, the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund) from filing an amicus brief in Khan v. Yale University seeking absolute immunity for the false accuser (5). In June, the Connecticut Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of Khan, rejecting the Legal Momentum arguments (6).

Criminal: Feminist organizations are pressuring prosecutors to not file criminal charges against false accusers, even though every state has laws that ban persons from making false reports. Last week a group known as End Violence Against Women International (EVAWI) released an email message titled, “Is Prosecution for False Reporting Ever Appropriate?”

The message links to a longer document with the provocative title, “Raped, Then Jailed: The Risks of Prosecution for Falsely Reporting Sexual Assault” (7). The report fails to clarify the key distinction between an allegation that is “unfounded” — not meeting the legal standard of proof — versus “false,” that is, made in bad faith.

The crux of the EVAWI argument is that prosecuting an accuser is contrary to the “public interest.” Predictably, the feminist organization’s concept of “public interest” excludes any consideration of the effects of a bogus accusation on the falsely accused, including its devastating effects on the person’s reputation, mental and physical health, social standing, and career opportunities.

Worse, EVAWI never mentions the fact that false allegations and perjury are now the number one cause of wrongful convictions, according to the National Registry of Exonerations (8).

September 9 is International Falsely Accused Day (9). The global event is intended to raise awareness of how easy it is to fall victim to a false accusation, to point out how the presumption of innocence has been eroded, and how the law continues to be upended in the name of “social justice.”

Citations:

Accountability Department of Justice Innocence Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Wrongful Convictions

PR: Georgia Tech Reinstatement is Evidence of Growing Public Alarm over Due Process and Free Speech on Campus

Post author By saveadmin
Post date January 6, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio
Telephone: 301-801-0608

Georgia Tech Reinstatement is Evidence of Growing Public Alarm over Due Process and Free Speech on Campus

WASHINGTON / January 6, 2016 – The recent decision to reinstate a Georgia Tech student expelled for an alleged sexual offense marks a growing wave of popular concern over the erosion of due process protections and free speech rights on college campuses.

Earlier this week the Georgia Tech Board of Regents overrode the decision by a school administrator who had recommended the expulsion of a student accused of sexual assault. The Board reinstated the student when it learned that the investigator failed to interview witnesses provided by the defendant and gave him only one hour to review a 13-page, single spaced summary of the investigation (1).

Numerous other judicial decisions or legal settlements in recent months have overturned the findings of campus sex tribunals for due process violations. The decisions involved the University of California-San Diego, University of Tennessee-Chattanooga, Washington and Lee University, University of Southern California, and Middlebury College (2).

Concerns over the loss of free speech rights are being voiced, as well. President Obama has twice called for the restoration of open debate on campuses, first at a town hall meeting on September 15 and more recently during a November 15 interview with George Stephanopoulos (3).

Legislators have also taken up the cause of restoring free speech. On June 2, 2015 the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Constitution held a hearing on the state of free speech on college campuses (4).

In Missouri more than 100 members of the state Legislature signed a letter to the University of Missouri’s board of curators demanding the “immediate firing” of a professor who attempted to have a reporter forcibly removed during a student protest (5).

The American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri likewise urged the University of Missouri to not compromise the right to free expression in its efforts to fight racism, saying, “Mistakenly addressing symptoms — instead of causes — and doing it in a way that runs counter to the First Amendment is not the wise or appropriate response.” (6)

“Due process and free speech are part of the American DNA,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “Lawmakers should not shrink from the challenge of restoring constitutionally-rooted rights and protections to college campuses.”

1. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/expelled-georgia-tech-student-reinstated/article/2579610
2. http://www.saveservices.org/2015/09/pr-due-process-gains-momentum-moves-to-center-stage-in-campus-sexual-assault-debate/
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PlcALRh6Og
4. http://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU10/20150602/103548/HHRG-114-JU10-20150602-SD003.pdf
5. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/05/missouri-lawmakers-flex-muscles-in-call-for-professors-firing.html?intcmp=hpbt2
6. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/11/12/aclu-urges-university-missouri-to-better-protect-students-free-speech.html

Bills Campus Civil Rights DED Sexual Assault Directive Innocence Law Enforcement Press Release Sexual Assault

Safety of Our Students: SAVE Calls on Congress to Fix Broken System of Campus Rape Panels

Post author By saveadmin
Post date May 21, 2014

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: teristoddard@saveservices.org

Safety of Our Students: SAVE Calls on Congress to Fix Broken System of Campus Rape Panels

WASHINGTON / May 21, 2014 – Based on growing complaints by victims and accused students, Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE) is calling on Congress to fix the current system of campus disciplinary committees. A 2011 federal policy mandated that these panels adjudicate claims of campus sexual assault. Over 350 editorials to date have sharply criticized the boards both for shortchanging victims and violating the rights of the accused: www.accusingu.org

SAVE is proposing enactment of a new law entitled “SOS: Safety of Our Students.” The law would require that all allegations of campus criminal sexual assault be referred to local criminal justice authorities for investigation and adjudication. The full text of the bill can be seen here: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/campus-rape-courts

In 2011 the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights issued a “Dear Colleague” letter that shifted responsibility for campus rape cases to the committees that handle cheating and plagiarism cases. These panels lack legal authority to subpoena witnesses, conduct in-depth investigations, or impose criminal sanctions.

On May 1, 2014 the Department of Education announced it was launching investigations of 55 universities for “possible violations of federal law over the handling of sexual violence and harassment complaints.” The probe underscores federal concerns over the turmoil and confusion that the current system is now experiencing.

Five days later a USA Today Editorial Board column charged the current approach is “failing” because the “strongest punishment schools can deliver is to expel a rapist from campus.” A May 13 editorial by the Los Angeles Times Board echoed similar concerns.

“Despite the best of intentions by its proponents, the current system represents second-class justice to victims and third-world justice for the accused,” charges SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “We call on Congress to act promptly to respond to the growing crisis in handling campus rape cases.”

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments—SAVE—is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Accusing U. Campus Innocence Press Release Rape-Culture Hysteria Sexual Assault

PR: SAVE Deplores Orwellian Claims Surrounding California Campus Sex Bill

Post author By saveadmin
Post date March 25, 2014

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: teristoddard@saveservices.org

SAVE Deplores Orwellian Claims Surrounding California Campus Sex Bill

WASHINGTON / March 25, 2014 – Senate Bill 967, which would impose an “affirmative consent” standard on sexual activities at California colleges, has attracted national attention. SAVE believes that campus sexual assault is a problem that deserves greater attention. Since its inception, however, the controversial California bill has been surrounded by exaggerated and inflammatory claims that bear little relationship to the truth, SAVE says.

When Sen. de Leon introduced his affirmative consent bill on February 10, he highlighted reports in the Los Angeles Times that Occidental College had withheld 27 sexual assault cases from its Clery Act reports: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/10/6146048/california-bill-would-set-affirmative.html

But a March 14 LAT editorial retracted the newspaper’s prior claims, noting that the 27 unreported incidents “did not fall under the law’s disclosure requirements:” http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-editors-note-20140315,0,1134632.story#axzz2wHq5eFQN

De Leon has insisted his bill would reduce the number of campus sexual assaults. But his bill would not require assault cases to be reported to law enforcement authorities, meaning many rapists would be expelled from college, but not imprisoned. SAVE believes mere expulsion to be a woefully inadequate punishment for rape.

Dramatically expanding the definition of sexual assault would result in many more cases being processed by campus disciplinary boards. As a result, real victims will encounter longer delays and greater skepticism from university investigators, SAVE predicts.

Without offering evidence, de Leon claimed that current campus culture “stigmatizes survivors, not the perpetrators.” Given that media accounts typically name the accused but not the accuser, SAVE believes most stigma is placed on the accused, whether or not he is actually guilty of the alleged assault.

“The measure will change the equation so the system is not stacked against the survivors,” de Leon claimed, apparently unaware of the irony that civil rights experts say his bill would create a “vicious double standard” against the accused: http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/making-men-rapists

“The California bill was inspired by a policy that was tried at Antioch College in the 1990s. Student enrollments declined, and Antioch was forced to close its doors,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “We can only imagine what would happen if a similar misguided policy is imposed on California colleges.”

See SAVE’s Ten Steps to Turn Any Student into a Sex Offender: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/affirmative-consent

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments—SAVE—is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Accusing U. Bills Campus Innocence Press Release Sexual Assault

PR: Commentators Ridicule Campus Sex Bill, SAVE Says It Will Harm Victims

Post author By saveadmin
Post date March 11, 2014

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: teristoddard@saveservices.org

Commentators Ridicule Campus Sex Bill, SAVE Says It Will Harm Victims

WASHINGTON / March 11, 2014 – Editorial writers are criticizing Senate Bill 967 for removing due process protections and encouraging false allegations. Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, a victim advocacy group, says the bill’s broad definitions would serve to dissipate scarce resources and make it harder for victims to be believed.

SB 967 would require students contemplating any form of “sexual activity” to express their prior consent through “clear, unambiguous actions.” SB 967 also encourages partners to reaffirm consent on a continuing basis throughout the sex act.

National columnist Cathy Young reveals the notion of mandating verbal consent to sex has been “widely ridiculed as political correctness gone mad.” “With the California bill, we now have a state legislature effectively mandating how people—at least college students—should behave during sex,” Young notes. “Whatever happened to getting the government out of the bedroom?” http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2014/02/want_to_have_sex_sign_this_con.html

Civil rights expert KC Johnson believes SB 967 embodies a clear “hostility to due process” by mandating the “preponderance-of-evidence threshold in branding a student a rapist.” http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2014/02/a_deceptive_california_bill_on.html

By expanding the definition of sexual assault, the number of persons charged with sexual offenses would be likely to increase exponentially. Columnist Hans Bader asks, “How will classifying most consensual sex as rape help rape victims?” http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/03/09/california-activists-seek-redefine-quiet-consensual-sex-rape/

“The California bill would flood the system with students falsely accused of sexual assault,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “This would make investigators more skeptical of persons claiming to be raped, and leave real victims less likely to report the crime. Who in their right mind would want that?”

For more information, see SAVE’s Ten Steps to Turn Any Student into a Sex Offender: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/affirmative-consent/

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Accusing U. CAMP Campus DED Sexual Assault Directive Innocence Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

PR: Honor Independence Day by Demanding Govt. Bureaucrats Restore Freedom of Speech on College Campuses, SAVE Says

Post author By saveadmin
Post date July 1, 2013

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

Honor Independence Day by Demanding Govt. Bureaucrats Restore Freedom of Speech on College Campuses, SAVE Says

WASHINGTON / July 1, 2013 – During the days leading up to our annual Independence Day festivities, the non-profit group SAVE is calling on Americans to demand the U.S. Department of Justice to restore freedom of speech on college campuses.

On May 9, 2013 the U.S. Department of Justice reached a Settlement Agreement with the University of Montana. The Agreement expands the definition of sexual harassment to encompass any unwelcome conduct, including speech, of a sexual nature. “Unwelcome” would now be judged by a student’s subjective feelings, not by an objective “reasonable person” standard.

The Agreement specifies that its broad new definitions and procedures are intended to be used as a “blueprint” by other colleges. The policy thus applies to all faculty members and the 21 million undergraduate and graduate students at all universities receiving federal funding, and represents a national campus speech code, SAVE believes.

The May 9 policy has triggered controversy and spirited protest. To date, over 100 editorials have been published opposing the federal mandate: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/ded-directive/ded-editorials/.

Elected officials have expressed reservations, as well. In a June 26 letter to the Department of Justice, Arizona senator John McCain charged the DOJ’s new policy threatens free speech and raises “great concerns about the security of constitutional rights.” http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=818fd6f0-b009-240c-b963-7b7bb47f03fb

The McCain letter highlights examples how the DOJ directive could impair First Amendment rights: A student asking another student on a date; a professor assigning an English literature book that contains sexual allusions; or a student listening to music that contains content of a sexual nature overheard by others.

“Independence Day is about recalling and recommitting ourselves to the Founding Principles of our nation,” explains SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “If Americans don’t speak out now in defense of freedom of speech on campus, then how will our freedoms be protected the next time a clueless government bureaucrat comes along?”

The May 9 policy comes on top of a controversial 2011 Dept. of Education mandate requiring colleges to use the weakest preponderance-of-evidence standard in handling allegations of sexual assault and curtail other due process protections. More information on the effort to restore free speech on college campuses can be seen here: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/free-speech/

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault.

Civil Rights Discrimination Domestic Violence Innocence Law Enforcement Press Release Prosecutorial Misconduct Research Sexual Assault Special Report Wrongful Convictions

PR: Prosecutor Bias and Misconduct are Widespread, Says SAVE Report

Post author By saveadmin
Post date May 15, 2013

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

Prosecutor Bias and Misconduct are Widespread, Says SAVE Report

WASHINGTON / May 15 – A new report by Stop Abusive and Violent Environments highlights the problem of unethical conduct by prosecutors at the state and federal levels. “Prosecutor Bias and Misconduct in Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Cases” concludes a number of prosecutors have pursued overly zealous practices in sexual assault and domestic violence cases. Such practices erode constitutional guarantees of due process of law and probable cause.

Prosecutors are ethically required to evaluate allegations and only pursue those backed by probable cause. That’s because they wield the power of the state against the modest power of individuals who may be charged. Over the past two decades, prosecutors have often abandoned that role in favor of “win at any cost,” claims the new study.

That’s particularly true when the allegations involve sexual assault or domestic violence, according to the SAVE report.

Former sex-crimes prosecutor Rikki Klieman has noted, “Now people can be charged with virtually no evidence.” In the case of the Central Park Five, for example, five minors were coerced by prosecutors and police into pleading guilty to a crime they had no part in. The prosecutor obtained the confessions despite the absence of objective evidence connecting them to the crime.

The same is true in domestic violence cases.

Despite the fact that half of domestic violence is perpetrated by women, the vast majority of those arrested and charged are men. That’s because “dominant perpetrator” laws encourage the arrest of the larger, stronger partner, i.e., the man. Such gender-biased charging policies are unconstitutional, notes the SAVE report.

Prosecutor malfeasance has real-world consequences. In Virginia, 15% of sexual assault convictions were shown to be false by DNA evidence. In domestic violence cases, some 80 – 85% of allegations are ultimately recanted, but “no-drop” policies mean prosecutors often pursue them anyway.

“For the sake of our families and our system of justice, prosecutors must be held to long-established ethical standards,” says S.A.V.E. spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “Probable cause and due process of law cannot be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.”

S.A.V.E.’s new special report can be viewed here: http://www.saveservices.org/downloads/Prosecutor-Bias-Misconduct-in-Domestic-Violence

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to partner violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org.

Domestic Violence False Allegations Innocence Law Enforcement Media Press Release Prosecutorial Misconduct Sexual Assault Wrongful Convictions

PR: How Well is the Media Covering the Kellett Prosecutor Scandal?, SAVE Asks

Post author By saveadmin
Post date May 14, 2013

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

How Well is the Media Covering the Kellett Prosecutor Scandal?, SAVE Asks

WASHINGTON / May 14, 2013 – Three weeks ago a state ethics board issued a long-awaited report highly critical of Hancock Co. prosecutor Mary Kellett. Now a victim advocacy group is asking, Why have only two local media outlets covered the historic story?

Following a two-year investigation, the report is viewed as historic because the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar, charged with enforcing legal ethics codes, has never previously recommended the disbarment of a standing prosecutor.

On April 24, 2013 the ethics panel released a report showing assistant district attorney Mary N. Kellett ignored a court order, suppressed evidence, misled the jury, and engaged in “conduct unworthy of an attorney.” The report petitions the Maine Supreme Judicial Board to impose “appropriate disciplinary sanction” on ADA Kellett (1).

But three weeks later, only two media outlets, WABI TV and the Bangor Daily News, have provided coverage of the milestone story (2, 3).

SAVE notes the Kellett investigation has garnered extensive national media attention. Following release of the April 24 ethics report, two lengthy editorials appeared in national venues: “Discipline Case Against Prosecutor Mary Kellett Heating Up” (4) and “Filler Case Nearing Conclusion, Perhaps” (5). Over 10,000 persons have viewed accounts of the story on social media pages, as well.

SAVE invites reporters, editors, producers, and other media representatives to review the timeline of events (6), which raises the worrisome question of whether ADA Kellett charged the wrong person with the crime.

“When a Hancock County man was charged with spousal assault, media outlets provided wall-to-wall coverage,” notes SAVE spokesman Howard Goldman. “But when an overly zealous prosecutor is found guilty on multiple counts of unethical conduct, local media outlets seem to dawdle.”

SAVE filed a 9-page ethics complaint in 2011 alleging numerous instances of prosecutor misconduct (7). Over 1,400 persons have signed a petition calling for the disbarment of the prosecutor (8).

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Accusing U. Campus Civil Rights DED Sexual Assault Directive Innocence Press Release Sexual Assault Wrongful Convictions

PR: ‘Point of Parody:’ Six More Editorials Slam Campus Sex Assault Panels

Post author By saveadmin
Post date May 1, 2013

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

‘Point of Parody:’ Six More Editorials Slam Campus Sex Assault Panels

WASHINGTON / May 1, 2013 – Campus sex assault committees at Swarthmore, Occidental, Brown, and Cornell found themselves at the center of satire and scrutiny this past week as six new editorials probed sex assault complaints at these institutions. SAVE calls on the Department of Education to respond to allegations of civil rights violations arising from a 2011 policy issued by its Office for Civil Rights.

One editorial, “Swarthmore, Occidental, and Their Kangaroo Courts,” documents how Swarthmore College mandates that the accused refrain from any outside discussion of the allegation, thus precluding assistance by a defense attorney. At Swarthmore, “an accused student can be punished even if no charges were filed against him,” thus reaching the “point of parody,” columnist KC Johnson asserts.

Dr. Helen Smith takes the argument a step farther, wondering if breaches of due process for the accused represent a “Secret War on Men?” Smith charges universities have “established a kangaroo campus court system” for alleged sexual misconduct that have “little due process protection.” These procedures form part of a larger “hostile environment on campuses” for men, Smith believes.

Professor Walter Mead places the Department of Education’s sexual assault mandate within the context of heavy drug use, binge drinking, and hook up culture that have “turned many campuses into genuinely toxic environments.” But abandoning “our commitment to ideas like the presumption of innocence will not fix what is wrong on campus today,” Mead warns.

“The federal sex assault mandate has become a wrecking ball to fundamental concepts of democratic society like due process and the presumption of innocence,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sherry Warner-Seefeld. “The refusal of the federal Department of Education to respond to numerous letters must be seen as tacit acknowledgement of the civil rights travesty it has created.”

The six editorials, published during the week of April 21-27, 2013, are listed online (1). To date, over 120 editorials have criticized the DED mandate as an anathema to civil rights. Thirteen national organizations, including the American Association for University Professors, have called for repeal of the federal mandate (2).

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org