Category: Press Release

PR: 25 Worst Colleges for Campus Due Process

Post author By saveadmin
Post date November 6, 2019

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

25 Worst Colleges for Campus Due Process

WASHINGTON / November 7, 2019 – Today SAVE, a leading campus due process organization, is releasing a list of the 25 worst colleges and university for campus fairness and due process. The colleges were selected based on a detailed review of dozens of lawsuits by students accused of sexual assault, and subsequently expelled or suspended by their university, in which the judge later issued a ruling at least partly favorable to the student (1).

The lawsuits feature a jarring range of due process violations such as a 7-hour hearing; judge-jury-executioner style investigations; exclusion of exculpatory evidence; public defamations; a made-up confession; failure to consider previous false allegations by the accuser; reliance on a flawed ‘affirmative consent’ standard; a fabricated tape recording; a victim treated as a perpetrator; and a case in which the supposed “victim” repeatedly insisted she was not a victim.

The lawsuits call to mind the guilt-presuming methods featured in Franz Kafka’s novel, The Trial, the corrupt show trials exposed in Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago, and recent satires in which campus disciplinary committees are derided as “Kangaroo Courts.”

Following are the 25 colleges identified with deficient campus procedures:

California: University of California-Santa Barbara and University of Southern California, Los Angeles
Colorado: Colorado State University, Pueblo
Connecticut: Quinnipiac University, Hamden and Yale University, New Haven
District of Columbia: George Washington University, Washington, DC
Florida: University of Miami
Georgia: Georgia Tech University, Atlanta
Indiana: Purdue University, West Lafayette
Massachusetts: Brandeis University, Waltham; Amherst College; and Boston College, Newton
Michigan: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Mississippi: University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg
New York: Columbia University, New York
Ohio: University of Cincinnati
Oregon: University of Oregon, Eugene
Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University, Centre County
Rhode Island: Brown University, Providence
South Dakota: Augustana University, Sioux Falls
Tennessee: Rhodes College, Memphis; University of Tennessee-Knoxville
Texas: University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, Dallas
Virginia: James Madison University, Harrisonburg
Vermont: Middlebury College

Descriptions of each of the lawsuits, including links to the judicial opinions, are available online (2). SAVE urges students considering attendance at these colleges to identify other institutions with a record of respect for constitutionally rooted due process measures.

The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights is expected to issue new Title IX regulations that will strengthen due process protections on college campuses (3).

Citations:

http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/complaints-and-lawsuits/lawsuit-analysis/
http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/restore-fairness/25-worst-colleges-for-campus-due-process/
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDetails?rrid=129772

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

Milestone Award in Maine to Compensate Victim of Prosecutorial Misconduct

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 2, 2018

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Milestone Award in Maine to Compensate Victim of Prosecutorial Misconduct

WASHINGTON / October 2, 2018 – In a first for Maine, the state has agreed to compensate a victim of prosecutorial misconduct. Last week it was announced that the state will pay Vladek Filler a settlement of $375,000, arising from the misconduct of former Hancock County Assistant District Attorney Mary Kellett, police officials, and others.

In 2007, Ligia Filler alleged she was a victim of marital rape. Ignoring exculpatory evidence, ADA Kellett prosecuted Vladek on several counts of sexual assault. Filler was convicted of assault, but was cleared of the rape charges made during a divorce and child custody battle. Eventually, the assault charge was also dismissed.

In 2011, SAVE filed a Grievance Complaint against Kellett with the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar alleging improper withholding of evidence and other misconduct. On May 12, 2011, SAVE held a press conference at the Penobscot Judicial Center in Bangor (1).

The complaint was investigated and eventually referred to the Maine Supreme Court, which ruled against the prosecutor in 2013. Mary Kellett issued a public apology and was required to attend ethics training. She later resigned her position.

In 2015, Vladek filed a civil rights lawsuit against Kellett and other parties. The lawsuit against a nurse who coached Ligia to cry during testimony to make her claims more credible is still outstanding (2).

More information on Vladek Filler’s exoneration is available from the National Registry of Exonerations (3). The legal documents of the lawsuit are available online (4).

October 2 is Wrongful Conviction Day (5).

Citations:

http://www.saveservices.org/camp/intolerable-injustice/
https://www.dailywire.com/news/36302/maine-man-receives-375000-after-false-rape-ashe-schow
https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4694
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/6844884/FILLER_v_HANCOCK_COUNTY_et_al#
http://www.intlwrongfulconvictionday.org/

SAVE — Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — is working for effective and fair solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

SAVE Calls on Sen. Hirono to Withdraw and Apologize for Sexist ‘Shut-Up’ Remarks

Post author By saveadmin
Post date September 21, 2018

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Email: info@saveservices.org

SAVE Calls on Sen. Hirono to Withdraw and Apologize for Sexist ‘Shut-Up’ Remarks

WASHINGTON / September 21, 2018 – During a Tuesday press conference, Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii made remarks that have stirred controversy about the diminished importance of free speech and due process in America. Commenting on a possible FBI investigation of allegations of sexual misconduct against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Hirono declared, “Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed… I just want to say to the men in this country — just shut up and step up!.” [emphasis added] (1)

A recent YouGov poll confirms a different picture. The poll found only one-quarter of Americans believe the sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh to be credible. When asked: “Do you think that the allegation of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh generally is or is not credible?” 28% of men said it was credible, while 25% of women gave the same response (2).

Patrice Lee Onwuka of the Independent Women’s Forum emphasizes, “We cannot abandon the presumption of innocence because assuming he’s ‘probably guilty’ serves certain political motives…. it’s wrong to jump to conclusions or use unsubstantiated allegations for political purposes. Not only is that unfair to the accused but it sets up a harmful precedent for the future.” (3)

Writing in the Boston Globe, Jennifer Braceras wrote, “The she-said/he-said nature of the allegations; Ford’s failure to mention the event to anyone for decades; and her inability to provide key details such the location or specific time frame of the alleged assault raise reasonable questions about her credibility.” (4)

One of the strongest critics of Hirono’s remarks was Fox News host Tucker Carlson. During his September 19 monologue, Carlson commented on the meaning of Hirono’s statement:

“It’s not just Brett Kavanaugh that’s guilty, but ‘the men of this country,’ every single one of them, Carlson said, because they’re men. Tucker also said liberals recently ignored a woman who accused Keith Ellison of sexual assault, which occurred within the last year, not 36 years ago.

“That’s a command from the United States senator,” Carlson said of Hirono’s call for men to shut up. “It’s not optional, it’s mandatory. So repeat after Mazie Hirono: Men always lie, women never do. One sex is evil, the other is holy. That’s the Catechism of the Church of Late-Stage Feminism.” (5)

Seldom has an elected official instructed a class of Americans to “shut up,” or to accept the veracity of a sexual assault allegation without corroboration. The First Amendment guarantees the right to express opinions and beliefs. The presumption of innocence is a key element of due process, which is guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

SAVE believes justice is best served when Constitutional guarantees of due process are respected, not when lawmakers engage in a politically calculated rush to judgement.

Citations:

SAVE — Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — is working for effective and fair solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus Press Release Sexual Assault

PR: 23 Cornell Law Profs Support Suspended Student in Sexual Assault Appeal

Post author By saveadmin
Post date April 3, 2018

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

23 Cornell Law Profs Support Suspended Student in Sexual Assault Appeal

WASHINGTON / April 3, 2018 – Twenty-three Cornell Law School professors have requested to file an Amicus Brief in support of a student who was accused of campus sexual assault and later suspended. The Cornell statement is the fourth statement from law professors calling for the restoration of due process rights on campus.

Two Cornell students had a sexual encounter in August of 2016. The woman filed a complaint, claiming she had consumed too much alcohol to give valid consent. The university panel later recommended that the male student, “John Doe,” be suspended for two years. The student has now appealed the suspension to the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, which is the intermediary appeals court in that state.

The crux of the appeal is the right of a student to cross-examine his accuser. The male student submitted a series of questions to the university panel to be answered by the woman. But Cornell refused to forward any of the questions, thereby negating the student’s right to cross-examination.

The professors’ Statement of Interest notes, “we have an interest in ensuring that Cornell’s procedures are interpreted properly and applied fairly and faithfully. And, as is explained below, we believe that in this case, a Cornell disciplinary hearing panel failed to comply with an important procedural safeguard clearly set out in Cornell’s Title IX policy – the right of an accused student to have a disciplinary hearing panel conduct inquiry of his accuser about proper topics that he proposed.” (1)

The Cornell professors’ Motion to File Amicus Brief is the fourth public statement by law professors in support of due process in campus sexual assault cases. The other letters were filed by law professors from Harvard Law School (2), University of Pennsylvania (3), and from other universities (4).

In 86 cases, judges have ruled in favor of accused students who have filed lawsuits against their universities (5). SAVE anticipates that professors from other law schools will offer statements in support of campus due process.

Citations:

SAVE — Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — is working for effective and fair solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Campus DED Sexual Assault Directive Due Process Office for Civil Rights Press Release

PR: Universities Face Major Changes in Title IX Landscape as Administrators Prepare for Fall Semester

Post author By saveadmin
Post date August 14, 2017

Contact: Christopher Perry

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: cperry@saveservices.org

Universities Face Major Changes in Title IX Landscape as Administrators Prepare for Fall Semester

WASHINGTON / August 14, 2017 – Last week the University of Georgia Board of Regents approved wide-ranging changes in the sexual assault policies at the campuses it oversees. The revisions were designed to strengthen oversight, assure a consistent process for all cases, and place more emphasis on prevention and education (1). The changes were made in response to developments in the Title IX landscape that are occurring across the nation.

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE) has identified eight shifts in the policy landscape that have emerged in the past 12 months. SAVE invites administrators to review these developments and make necessary updates to campus policies:

State legislation. Responding to reports of unconstitutional practices on campuses, state lawmakers have introduced 22 bills designed to restore free speech or due process protections to college students. To date, eight of these bills have been passed into law in Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia (2).

Liability risks. The number of lawsuits by accused students is on the rise. Since 2013, judges have issued rulings on 55 lawsuits filed against universities that were at least partly favorable to the accused student (3). Last week it was reported that an average of $187,000 is spent per case filed by accused students (4).

“Victim-centered” investigations. Investigations based on the “always believe the victim” model are often implicated in lawsuits by accused students against universities. An analysis of these lawsuits concluded that “victim-centered” approaches “are inconsistent with the most basic notions of fairness, repudiate the presumption of innocence, and are likely to lead to wrongful determinations of guilt.” (5)

OCR complaints by identified victims. Following issuance of the Dear Colleague Letter in 2011, thousands of identified victims have filed complaints with the Office for Civil Rights alleging mistreatment by campus officials. Some identified victims claimed their experience with the campus adjudication process was more traumatic than the original assault (6).

Administrator concerns. John McCardell, Vice Chancellor of the University of the South at Sewanee, Tennessee, recently charged the OCR’s Dear Colleague Letter has “imposed on entities ill-trained or equipped for the task, a quasi-judicial role, with the implication that ‘justice,’ however defined, can be satisfactorily rendered through processes that cannot possibly replicate a genuine legal proceeding.” (7) An Inside Higher Ed article on the annual meeting of the National Association of College and University Attorneys reported, “Many college and university officials felt overregulated by the Obama administration, and have expressed interest in seeing that oversight eased.” (8)

OCR investigations. In June, the Office for Civil Rights announced that it will narrow its investigational approach to focus only on the specific allegations of the complaint, not on cases that have been previously resolved by the college (9).

Expert reports. Five independent reports have recently called for an overhaul of the campus adjudication system (10):

American College of Trial Lawyers: Position Statement Regarding Campus Sexual Assault Investigations
SAVE: Six-Year Experiment in Campus Jurisprudence Fails to Make the Grade
NCHERM Group: Due Process and the Sex Police
American Bar Association Task Force for Promoting Fairness in Campus Sexual Misconduct Cases
Heritage Foundation: Campus Sexual Assault: Understanding the Problem and How to Fix It

Editorial criticisms. Thus far in 2017, over 300 editorials have been published at various newspapers and internet sites criticizing the recurring due process violations on campuses (11).

Citations:

SAVE (Stop Abusive and Violent Environments) is working to restore free speech and due process on college campuses: www.saveservices.org

Campus Press Release Sexual Assault Title IX

PR: SAVE Urges Massachusetts Lawmakers to End Campus Rape Tribunals

Post author By saveadmin
Post date April 10, 2017

Contact: Chris Perry

Telephone: 301-801-0608

Email: cperry@saveservices.org

SAVE Urges Massachusetts Lawmakers to End Campus Rape Tribunals

WASHINGTON / April 10, 2017 – The current system of campus-based adjudications for sexual assault has turned out to be inefficient, unfair, and in some cases harmful, according to a report released by the non-profit group, Stop Abusive and Violent Environments. The report, “Six-Year Experiment in Campus Jurisprudence Fails to Make the Grade,” was issued on the six-year anniversary of the controversial “Dear Colleague Letter” on sexual violence, first issued by the Department of Education on April 4, 2011.

The “Dear Colleague Letter” has not led to respectful, fair, and prompt resolutions. Rather, complaints to the Office for Civil Rights and federal lawsuits that identify flawed campus procedures increased six-fold after the Department of Education letter was released.

The SAVE report identifies numerous cases in which identified victims of sexual assault claimed their colleges failed to appropriately investigate, adjudicate, and sanction their complaints. In one case, a female student charged that campus authorities at Harvard University showed “deliberate indifference” to her sexual assault claim. Her claim focused not only on the school’s initial response, but also on the University’s failure to respond “to her multiple reports that she was subjected to continuous, retaliatory harassment by [John] Doe and his friends.”

Numerous accused students have filed federal lawsuits as well. In one recent case, a judge criticized Brandeis University for “appear[ing] to have substantially impaired, if not eliminated, an accused student’s right to a fair and impartial process.” Among the 51 known lawsuits filed by accused students since 2012, a majority of the rulings from federal judges have been decided at least partly in favor of the expelled student.

The Massachusetts legislature is currently considering S.706 and H.632 which would codify many provisions of the “Dear Colleague Letter.” Instead, SAVE urges the enactment of the Campus Equality, Fairness, and Transparency Act. CEFTA aims to protect all students by encouraging the referral of campus rape cases to law enforcement officials and providing due process: http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/cefta/.

Identified victims and accused students share a common, over-riding interest in assuring the investigative and adjudicatory process is conducted in a respectful, prompt, and fair manner in order to reach reliable outcomes.

The SAVE report can be viewed here: http://www.saveservices.org/reports/.

SAVE (Stop Abusive and Violent Environments) is working for fair and effective solutions to campus sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Accountability Campus Civil Rights Department of Justice Discrimination Law Enforcement Office for Civil Rights Press Release Research Training Victims

PR: Expert Panel Calls on Lawmakers to Bring an End to Campus ‘Kangaroo Court’ Investigations

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 11, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: glauterio@saveservices.org

Expert Panel Calls on Lawmakers to Bring an End to Campus ‘Kangaroo Court’ Investigations

WASHINGTON / October 11, 2016 – Warning “victim-centered” investigations are “inconsistent with basic notions of fairness and justice,” an Expert Panel has issued a report calling on lawmakers to end such approaches in campus sexual assault cases (1). The Expert Panel was convened in observance of Wrongful Conviction Day on October 4 and addressed the growing problem of “victim-centered” investigations at colleges and in the criminal justice system.

“Victim-centered” methods abandon traditional notions of impartiality and objectivity, and instead call on investigators to presume that “all sexual assault cases are valid unless established otherwise by investigative findings,” as one report enjoins (2). Such recommendations represent a negation of the long-held tenet of the presumption of innocence, and are likely to lead to wrongful determinations of guilt.

One of the expert panelists was Michael Conzachi, a former homicide detective and police academy instructor. Conzachi sharply criticized the University of Texas-Austin document Blueprint for Campus Police, saying its recommendations to remove inconsistent statements and exculpatory information from investigational reports represent a potential violation of laws that bar evidence concealment and tampering.

E. Everett Bartlett, president of the Center for Prosecutor Integrity, reported that many lawsuits by accused students against universities now include allegations of investigational impropriety. He identified nine categories of investigational biases claimed in campus lawsuits such as Overt bias/Predetermination of guilt and Inadequate investigator qualifications.

SAVE has developed a model bill titled the Campus Equality, Fairness, and Transparency Act (CEFTA). The bill mandates the use of “justice-centered” investigations that would require campus investigators to “discharge their duties with objectivity and impartiality” (3).

Press Release Sexual Assault

PR: How ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations Undermine the Presumption of Innocence and Victimize the Innocent

Post author By saveadmin
Post date September 19, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio
Email: glauterio@prosecutorintegrity.org

How ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations Undermine the Presumption of Innocence and Victimize the Innocent: Upcoming Teleconference

WASHINGTON / September 19, 2016 – A national teleconference will be held on the topic, “How ‘Victim-Centered’ Investigations Undermine the Presumption of Innocence and Victimize the Innocent.” The event will address how “victim-centered” investigations remove the presumption of innocence and greatly increase the risk of a wrongful finding of guilt. The teleconference will be held on October 4 at 1:00 to 4:00 pm, Eastern time.

The Department of Education has repeatedly issued directives calling for equitable campus investigations. In 2001 the Office for Civil Rights issued its Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance mandating that universities undertake “adequate, reliable, and impartial investigation of complaints.” Likewise, the OCR’s 2011 Dear Colleague Letter on campus violence explained, “a school’s investigation and hearing processes cannot be equitable unless they are impartial.”

In contrast, victim-centered investigations are based on the assumptions of “start by believing” and “always believe the victim.”

The teleconference will address victim-centered investigations on both college campuses and in the criminal justice setting. The Forum will consist of presentations by leading investigators, attorneys, and other experts:

Cynthia Garrett: Welcome and Introduction
Christopher Perry: What is the Problem with Victim-Centered Investigations?
Jerry Rogoff: The Psychological Effects on Persons Wrongfully Found Guilty of Sexual Misconduct
Carolyn Martin: My Lawsuit to End Investigative Bias at the Department of the Navy
Claudia Whitman: How to Botch a Criminal Investigation in Ten Easy Steps
Michael Conzachi: University of Texas Blueprint for Injustice

Harvard Law School professor Jeannie Suk describes the always-believe-the-victim approach as a “near-religious teaching” that is likely to harm rape victims: “When the core belief is that accusers never lie, if any one accuser has lied, it brings into question the stability of the entire thought system, rendering uncertain all allegations of sexual assault.” http://www.saveservices.org/sexual-assault/investigations/

The teleconference, sponsored by the non-profit Center for Prosecutor Integrity, will be available free of charge. Registration information will be made available here: http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/wrongful-conviction-day/forum/

Accountability Accusing U. Affirmative Consent Due Process Press Release Rape-Culture Hysteria Victims

PR: American Law Institute Pulls the Plug on Affirmative Consent

Post author By saveadmin
Post date May 23, 2016

Contact: Gina Lauterio
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: glauterio@saveservices.org

American Law Institute Pulls the Plug on Affirmative Consent

WASHINGTON / May 23, 2016 – By a resounding margin, members of the American Law Institute voted down a controversial “affirmative consent” standard being considered for the group’s proposed Model Penal Code for Sexual Assault. Instead, the ALI membership approved a definition proposed by attorney Margaret Love that states, “’Consent’ means a person’s willingness to engage in a specific act of sexual penetration or sexual contact. Consent may be expressed or it may be inferred from behavior, including words and conduct—both action and inaction—in the context of all the circumstances.” (1)

The historic vote took place at the ALI annual conference on May 17 in Washington, DC. After two hours of at times acrimonious debate, approximately four-fifths of the 500 members present voted to remove the affirmative consent language (2). Leading judges, law professors, and practicing attorneys comprise the membership of ALI, which develops model laws for adoption at the state level.

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers had sharply criticized the proposed affirmative consent policy, charging the ALI draft used “the bludgeon of criminal sanctions to impose the new and yet untested concept of ‘affirmative consent’ upon society.” (3)

The affirmative consent standard has been struck down in two state-level decisions, as well.

In August, Judge Carol McCoy ruled the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga’s affirmative consent policy “erroneously shifted the burden of proof” to the defendant. The administrative judge noted that “requiring the accused to affirmatively provide consent… is flawed and untenable if due process is to be afforded to the accused.” (4)

Last month the Massachusetts District Court ruled against the Brandeis University affirmative consent policy, saying “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.” (5)

Decrying the rigidity and intrusiveness of the affirmative consent approach, Newsday columnist Cathy Young asks, “While there’s still time, we should stop and ask just how much government we really want in the bedroom.” (6) More information about affirmative consent can be found on the SAVE website (7).

(1) https://www.ali.org/media/filer_public/19/a4/19a45dd8-da30-44d5-a4a1-5bb3992a3521/mpcsa-language-52016.pdf
(2) http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/a-mess-law-group-rejects-affirmative-consent/article/2591692
(3) http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/NACDL-Comments-Draft-6-MPC-Sexual-Assault.pdf
(4) https://kcjohnson.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/memorandum-mock.pdf
(5) https://kcjohnson.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/brandeis-decision.pdf
(6) http://www.newsday.com/opinion/columnists/cathy-young/the-risks-of-affirmative-consent-1.11819583
(7) 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