The
increase of Title
IX violations and lawsuits against universities has led many to question
why sexually motivated crimes can be investigated, tried, and decided upon by
educational institutions instead of criminal proceedings through the justice
system.
In
addition to promoting gender equality in athletics and student organizations,
Title IX also protects individuals from many other forms of gender-based
discrimination. Additionally, it requires schools receiving federal funding to
actively combat sexual assault and gender based violence. Under the Clery Act, schools
are also required to inform students who have experienced any type of sexual
assault of all their options, including the option to report the incident to
the police and pursue criminal charges.
The
current policies require educational institutions to have some disciplinary
process for complaints of sexual harassment and sexual violence. These
standards include investigating complaints in a prompt manner and ensuring a
non-hostile environment for students reporting an incident. Many large
universities currently have judicial boards or standards boards that hear the
cases, review the evidence, and decide on the appropriate action. One of the
main reasons a student might opt to pursue only a disciplinary hearing through
an educational institution instead of a criminal proceeding is because the
standard of evidence is ‘preponderance of
the evidence’ not the criminal standard of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ since Title IX is a federal civil right.
This standard of evidence makes it more likely that a student will prevail in his
or her case and see some type of action taken in his or her favor. The main
issue is that many educational institutions, specifically colleges and
universities, seem to either be apathetic to the problem or are ill equipped to
handle these cases.
In
recent Title IX lawsuits, many students who have faced sexual harassment or
assault claim that the campus security and administrators were unhelpful and
even discouraged them from reporting their incidents. In a recent case, the University
of Connecticut paid a $1.3 million dollar settlement to end a Title IX case
brought against them. One student involved in the case said that a female
university police officer said that “women have to just stop spreading their
legs like peanut butter,” or rape will “keep on happening till the cows come
home.” Another student decided to go forward with the Title IX case after the
school’s disciplinary actions were insufficient. The student went through a
disciplinary hearing and her attacker was expelled from the university.
However, ultimately he was able to return to campus without any notice given to
her. All the women involved in the University of Connecticut case claimed that
they were not adequately informed about their legal options.
The
University of Connecticut is just one of the 43 institutions of higher learning
that the United
States Department of Education has identified as having an open Title IX
investigation. Colleges and universities have an interest in keeping their
sexual assault numbers low and discouraging victims of assault from pursuing
action against their attackers. Under the Clery Act, schools have to make their
sexual assault statistics available to the public and the fewer incidents reported
the better.
Based
on the recurring issues, it seems like the appropriate action to take would be
not allowing institutions of learning to play judge and jury, but rather to allow
the justice system to intervene in these types of incidents in schools.
However, forcing students to file criminal proceedings instead of disciplinary
hearings may discourage students from reporting instances of sexual assault and
sexual violence. The purpose of allowing institutions such as colleges and
universities to have disciplinary hearings instead of filing for criminal
proceedings is seemingly a way to help victims of sex-related crimes to seek
justice without having to hire an attorney, deal with a criminal trial, and
face a higher standard of evidence; but when universities are constantly
failing to provide support for students who choose not to file criminal charges
there is no justice for the victim.
If
institutions for higher education are no longer deemed fit to handle cases of
sexual assault and sexual violence, there will be an impact on practitioners in
the field of criminal law. There will be many victims who choose to take their
case to criminal court, which would impact the caseload of local courts as well
as local prosecutors and public defenders. An increase of cases with little to
no evidence can be a financial burden on the local court systems. There will
also be victims who prefer not to go through a criminal proceeding, and not
report these crimes at all. This course of action would be detrimental to the
field of criminal justice because it would allow perpetrators the ability to
commit sex-related crimes without fear of consequence. These issues present a
frustrating dilemma; which entity is best equipped to handle cases of campus
sexual assault, the justice system or the school? At this point, there does not
seem to be a clear answer.
Monisha
Rao
Staffer,
Criminal Law Practitioner
Photo by
lculig via ShutterStock
No comments:
Post a Comment