Category: Sexual Assault

Categories
Accusing U. Affirmative Consent Campus False Allegations Sexual Assault

Feminist Says No to California’s Yes-Means-Yes Law … Here’s Why

Roz Galtz
October 10, 2014

GUEST WORDS-As a lifelong, hardcore feminist—not to mention the mom of a teenage girl—I know I’m supposed to be overjoyed by passage of California’s SB 967, the law that enshrines a “yes-means-yes” consent standard for sexual assault on college and university campuses. (You’ve got to confirm your partner’s active consent throughout a sexual encounter, or the facts will support a sexual assault claim.

I want to be happy. It feels like forever since feminists have had a win. Still, I can’t help but dislike this bill entirely.

How did we get to a place where we uncritically celebrate a law meant to enhance justice for survivors of sexual assault, but only if they’re enrolled in a college or university?

Let’s start by acknowledging: college women are at no greater risk of sexual assault than other women their age. Given the reporting, you’re probably tempted to dismiss that assertion out of hand, but check it out. Rely on nearly any set of measures you’d like. As tricky as sexual assault stats can be, the evidence is nearly uniform on this point. Campus women aren’t at greater risk than their non-academic sisters, they’re just more aggregated in space.

So how did we get here? There are a number of explanations, but ultimately the only reason we need to rethink campus policies on sexual assault in the first place is that campuses are permitted to adjudicate them.

For far too long, residential campuses have been permitted to act as little, make-believe municipalities, complete with their own quasi-judicial processes, staffed by faculty who just love the buzz of the solemnity of getting to play judge.

When I try to envision a campus sexual assault proceeding, I flash on the case of a kid at a “living learning” program where I used to teach. After an RA busted him for trouble in the dorms, he distributed hundreds of copies of a disordered, rambling tract targeting her. He promised to get stray dogs to urinate all over her. He declared “open f-cking season on dumb tw-ts now” (a threat with a little extra oomph, coming from a burly guy who dressed in full combat fatigues).

The RA was terrified and terrorized—forced to flee the dorm that was both her housing and her job site.

This wasn’t a sexual assault, but the program’s response was telling. Was the guy arrested? Put before a disciplinary board? Subject to a mandatory psych eval? Did the RA receive some form of protection? Was she given a say in how the problem was handled?

The answer, as far as I could ever learn, was no on every count.

Administrators seemed anxious to keep things in house. The program was under scrutiny for its high costs and persistent crises. A senior faculty member had recently racked up his second reprimand for sexual harassment. The last thing anyone wanted was another black eye.

Faculty sentiment also ran decidedly against formal discipline, which may have led to expulsion given the student’s “priors.” Rationales for were varied—one prof simply maintained there was no way this kid could be a threat because: “I’ve had him in several classes, and he’s always been very quiet.”

(No, seriously, that’s what he said.) Of course, “this kid” was white. Does anyone buy for a minute that a burly black dude who dressed like a sniper could plaster his college with vows to torture and kill a white female RA and walk away with no repercussions…because he was quiet in class?

Now consider: these are the same folks assembling with all sense of seriousness to judge sexual assault claims on campuses. Don’t get me wrong, people with PhDs are probably no less likely than the rest of the population to be thoughtful about gender, violence, and race when confronting real-life conflict; but let’s not kid ourselves—they’re not liable to be more.

Administrators are, meanwhile, directly, materially tethered to the reputations of their institutions. No one who understands this should be surprised to learn that sexual assault adjudications are often delayed till the aggressor graduates or the victim drops out.

The cosplay that is campus criminal justice was simply never about valuing women’s lives in the first place. It’s always been about protecting institutions.

So what to do?

Source: http://www.citywatchla.com/8br-hidden/7677-feminist-says-no-to-california-s-yes-means-yes-law-here-s-why

Categories
Campus Sexual Assault

PR: SAVE Calls on Gov. Brown to Veto Bill that Would Endanger Rape Victims and Trivialize Sexual Assault

Contact: Gina Lauterio
Telephone: 908-783-3542
Email: info@saveservices.org

SAVE Calls on Gov. Brown to Veto Bill that Would Endanger Rape Victims and Trivialize Sexual Assault

WASHINGTON / September 25, 2014 – SAVE, a national victim-advocacy organization, is today calling on Gov. Jerry Brown to veto SB-967, which would impose an Affirmative Consent requirement on California colleges. The bill has been the focus of national ridicule and controversy since it was introduced earlier this year.

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments – SAVE – believes it is illogical to believe that a rapist intent on committing a violent assault would be deterred by the need to obtain a woman’s on-going “affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement,” as the law would require. SAVE charges the bill’s Affirmative Consent provisions would lull potential victims into a false of security.

SB-967 would also blur the distinction between consensual sex and criminal rape, SAVE says. This would serve to squander investigative resources on highly questionable cases and to trivialize the legitimate needs of rape survivors.

Robin Koerner has observed, “Most consensual sexual activity between normal people does not involve the kind of explicit, subsequently provable statement of consent, that this bill demands.” The bill would also have the effect of removing the presumption of innocence and removing due process protections for the accused: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koerner/no-sex-please-were-califo_b_5774674.html

Writing in the New Republic, Batya Ungar-Sargon recently argued SB-967 would only serve to codify a “troubling double standard” that would have the “potential to pervert justice.” http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119459/californias-campus-consent-laws-every-sex-act-potential-crime

“Not a single legislator who voted in favor of this bill has ever stated that he or she actually complies with the dictates of this bill in his or her private life,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “That says a lot how impractical SB-967 would be in real life.”

Numerous editorials have criticized and ridiculed the notion of Affirmative Consent: www.accusingu.org .

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

Categories
Bills Campus Press Release Sexual Assault

PR: Turning the Criminal Justice System into an After-Thought: SAVE Announces Opposition to Campus Accountability and Safety Act

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

Turning the Criminal Justice System into an After-Thought:

SAVE Announces Opposition to Campus Accountability and Safety Act

WASHINGTON / August 5, 2014 – Today Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE) is announcing its opposition to the Campus Accountability and Safety Act. The CASA bill was introduced last week by Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

By limiting the involvement of the criminal justice system, the bill would make it harder for thorough investigations to be completed, fair trials to be conducted, and appropriate sanctions to be imposed. The bill impairs the deployment of criminal justice resources in three ways:

1. The Act would not require campus rapes to be reported to law enforcement, thus thwarting the ability of trained investigators to collect evidence.

2. Campus security programs do not possess the legal authority to search FBI DNA and fingerprint databases. A match can prevent a future rape, and allow a previous crime to be solved, as well.

3. The law would preclude the local prosecutor’s office from filing charges unless and until the victim gave permission.

Over 200 editorials have criticized the existing system of campus disciplinary committees for failing to appropriately respond to victims’ needs and conducting shoddy investigations: www.accusingu.org . Even if the accused is found guilty, the most severe punishment is expulsion, a sanction that is woefully inadequate, most say.

The CASA bill has been sharply criticized for ignoring due process protections, as well. Charlotte Hays at the Independent Women’s Forum highlighted concerns about the “erosion of due process for the accused.” Diana Furchtgott-Roth of the Manhattan Institute charged the bill would encourage colleges to “throw out due process.”

“The CASA bill says the way to stop rape is to turn the criminal justice system into an administrative after-thought,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “Rape victims are outraged by this misguided attempt to handcuff the involvement of police, detectives, and prosecutors.”

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

Categories
Campus Civil Rights Sexual Assault Wrongful Convictions

PR: Campus Justice Coalition Seeks to Restore Fairness in Campus Sex Cases

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

Campus Justice Coalition Seeks to Restore Fairness in Campus Sex Cases

WASHINGTON / July 30, 2014 – Representatives of sexual assault victims, the accused, and universities have come together to establish the Campus Justice Coalition. The Coalition will seek to achieve legislative change to assure the proper handling of sexual assault cases on college campuses.

Campus sex committees have been criticized for being poorly trained, under-resourced, and lacking the legal authority to impose meaningful sanctions. Rape is a crime, but the campus boards possess legal authority to only expel, not imprison the perpetrator.

The current system was established by a 2011 Department of Education regulation which shifted the resolution process to campus disciplinary panels, and eliminated a number of due process safeguards. Under current policies, neither the identified victim or the accused person are allowed to be represented by an attorney.

Following imposition of the federal mandate, numerous complaints and lawsuits have been filed by victims, and by men claiming they were wrongfully expelled: http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/Campus-Sexual-Assault-Lawsuits.pdf

Basketball star Dez Wells was expelled from Xavier University in Ohio on allegations of non-consensual sex. The County prosecutor termed the expulsion “fundamentally unfair” and “seriously flawed.” In April the University paid an undisclosed amount, likely exceeding $1 million, to the former student: http://mynorthwest.com/33/2506222/Basketball-star-Wells-settles-suit-against-Xavier

Two weeks ago the University of Connecticut agreed to pay $900,000 to a student who was raped in August 2011. Despite the existence of the new federal policy, the university mishandled her complaint, and the alleged rapist never faced criminal charges: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/07/21/u-connecticut-pay-13-million-settle-sexual-assault-lawsuit#sthash.xJR5NBcw.dpbs

“The shadow-system of justice has betrayed victims and the accused, and has put universities in an impossible situation,” notes Campus Justice Coalition spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “Sexual assault cases require the full resources of the criminal justice system, not a sorry replay of vigilante justice meted out by untrained amateurs.”

More information on the Campus Justice Coalition can be seen here: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/campus-justice-coalition/

Categories
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

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

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

PR: SAVE Deplores Orwellian Claims Surrounding California Campus Sex Bill

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

Categories
Accusing U. Bills Campus Innocence Press Release Sexual Assault

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

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

Categories
Domestic Violence Press Release Sexual Assault

PR: SAVE Commends Groups for Debunking Super Bowl Abuse Myths

PRESS RELEASE

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

SAVE Commends Groups for Debunking Super Bowl Abuse Myths

WASHINGTON / February 7, 2014 – A leading victims-rights group is commending groups for speaking out to counter Super Bowl myths. Stop Abusive and Violent Environments – SAVE – believes misleading claims can promote faulty policies and divert scarce resources away from the very victims who need help the most.

SAVE highlights these groups for taking a public stand against Super Bowl abuse myths:

National Network to End Domestic Violence: The claim that Super Bowl Sunday is the “biggest day of the year for violence against women” has surfaced over the years. But NNEDV’s Cindy Southworth flatly dismisses the claim: “The Super Bowl does not cause domestic violence, and it doesn’t increase domestic violence.” http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2014/01/30/super-bowl-2014-myths-facts-legends/#ixzz2sTj7lNnK

Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women: Cindy McCain, wife of the Arizona senator, has labeled the Super Bowl “the largest human-trafficking venue on the planet.” But the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women has examined the record on sex trafficking related to the Super Bowl and other sporting events. The Alliance concludes, “despite massive media attention, law enforcement measures and efforts by prostitution abolitionist groups, there is no empirical evidence that trafficking for prostitution increases around large sporting events.” http://maggiemcneill.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/whats_the_cost_of_a_rumour-gaatw2011.pdf

Abuse myths have real-world consequences. Writing in the New York Times, Kate Mogulescujan explains that misleading the public is harmful “because it creates bad policy. In the days leading up to Sunday’s game, local law enforcement dedicated tremendous resources to targeting everyone engaged in prostitution.” http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/opinion/the-super-bowl-of-sex-trafficking.html

Fact Checker Joe Carter, who has also found the sex-trafficking claims to be false, notes, “when we exaggerate the problem it causes people to trivialize it as concern.” http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2014/01/30/factchecker-super-bowl-sex-trafficking-and-other-myths/

Despite these positive efforts, false domestic violence “factoids” are still commonplace. According to research by Dr. Denise Hines presented in the current issue of Partner Abuse, 27% of domestic violence agencies’ fact sheets include this claim: “Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women between the ages of 15 and 44.” But domestic violence does not appear among the top five leading causes of injury for women in this age group: http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfilead2000.html

“Abuse is a serious problem,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “But wildly inflating the numbers, stereotyping persons as abusers, and misrepresenting the problem ends up doing a grave disservice to victims.”

A SAVE report documents that domestic violence myths have become widespread: http://www.saveservices.org/downloads/SAVE-DV-Educational-Programs

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

Categories
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

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.

Categories
Accusing U. Campus Civil Rights DED Sexual Assault Directive Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment

PR: Accusing U. Launches Radio Campaign to Protect Free Speech on Campus

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

Accusing U. Launches Radio Campaign to Protect Free Speech on Campus

WASHINGTON / June 14, 2013 – The non-profit Accusing U. is launching a nationwide radio campaign designed to highlight how the recent Obama Administration’s sexual harassment mandate represents an unprecedented threat to free speech. The campaign will consist of radio interviews featuring Christina Hoff Sommers, well-known author, columnist, and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

On May 9, the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice unveiled a new campus policy that classifies speech as a form of sexual harassment, enlarges its scope to include any speech that is deemed “unwelcome,” and eliminates the reasonable person standard.

The policy applies to all faculty members and over 21 million undergraduate and graduate students at colleges receiving Department of Education funding.

The federal decision has proven to be controversial. Last week the Women’s Committee of the American Association of University Professors released a letter expressing concerns about the policy: http://www.saveservices.org/falsely-accused/sex-assault/accusing-u/complaints/

To date, over 85 editorials have been written opposing the decision: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/ded-directive/ded-editorials/ Columnists believe the policy will effectively ban discussion on controversial topics such as AIDS prevention and gay rights, and may require removal of sex-themed classical works from English literature courses.

“The federal policy represents a radical assault on the First Amendment rights of faculty and students alike,” explains Accusing U. spokesman Mike Thompson. “And what will happen if a student makes an unwelcome request for a date – will that be construed as sexual harassment?”

The May 9 policy comes on top of a divisive 2011 Dept. of Education mandate requiring colleges to use the weakest preponderance-of-evidence standard in handling allegations of sexual assault. The standard makes false allegations more likely, harming the credibility of victims.

Accusing U. — www.accusingu.org — is a project of Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault.