DUE Process Rights

Articles relating to due process rights for our College boys

, , , /

RELIGIOUS EXEMPTIONS and New Proposed Title IX Regulations For a Fairer Process

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos recently proposed new rules intended to remedy the perceived shortcomings of the Obama-era guidelines, including the concern that they have improperly undermined the rights of those who might have been falsely accused of sexual assault and harassment. Both religious and secular colleges have struggled with due-process issues in their attempts to implement Obama’s rules. And some Catholic colleges and other faith-based schools felt forced to obtain religious exemptions from the redefinition of gender in the Obama-era guidance.  Many Catholic schools claimed religious exemptions when the Obama administration’s Office of Civil Rights expanded its interpretations to concerns over conflict with the Church’s teaching on human sexuality. Now, under DeVos’ new rules, religious schools would no longer have to submit a written request for a religious exemption to the Department of Education. According to DOoED, involving religious schools in the process of requesting a religious exemption was unnecessary, burdensome and not in alignment with the original text of Title IX. “The additional language clarifying that the letter to the assistant secretary is not required to assert the exemption brings the regulatory language into alignment with long-standing department practice,” the proposed rule states.

ncregister By Lauretta Brown

 

 

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
LIKELY UNIVERSITY Win in 9th Circuit Due Process Case…Could be Bad for TIX Accused

, , , /

LIKELY UNIVERSITY Win in 9th Circuit Due Process Case…Could be Bad for TIX Accused

A frustrating oral argument today before a Ninth Circuit panel in Seattle seemed to foretell a victory by the University of Oregon in the first due process/Title IX lawsuit to reach the Ninth Circuit. While the panel did not seem particularly enthusiastic about Oregon’s case, there was nothing in the oral argument to suggest that a victory for the accused students was likely. Oregon’s general counsel appeared intent on obscuring the issues at play. The complaint in the case wasn’t particularly clear, vexing all three judges at various points in the argument. And the accused student’s lawyer devoted more than 20 percent of his oral argument time to a Title IX selective enforcement claim for which he could not produce any specific evidence from his complaint. It was a very curious tactical decision, especially given the due process concerns regarding a lack of cross-examination in the case.

If the university seems likely to prevail, the manner in which it does so could be quite significant. Because of the peculiar facts of this case, the court could choose to render an exceptionally narrow decision. On the other hand, there are enough troubling facts in this case–a rush-to-judgment statement from the UO president, a guilt-presuming campus atmosphere, very one-sided campus procedures–that a comprehensive ruling in Oregon’s favor could foreclose a wide range of lawsuits from accused students in the Ninth Circuit.

academicwonderland By KC Johnson

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
HUNDREDS of Lawyers Sign Letter in Favor of New Title IX Regulations

, , , /

HUNDREDS of Lawyers Sign Letter in Favor of New Title IX Regulations

Nearly 300 professors, lawyers, and Title IX experts have signed an open letter in favor of the newly proposed Title IX regulations, which bolster due process, allow cross-examination, and require the presumption of innocence. Organized by the Maryland nonprofit SAVE Services, the letter was unveiled by attorney Margaret Valois on Capitol Hill last Thursday and was compiled to shatter the myth that strengthening due process in Title IX investigations will hurt women, especially survivors.

“The numerous signatures reveal that noted attorneys, legal scholars, other professionals, and legislators… recognize and uphold the important concept of due process and recognize that it is lacking in campus disciplinary proceedings.” Margaret Valois “Now is not the time for complacency.”

pjmedia.com By Toni Airaksinen

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
JUDGE: Penn State’s Ban on Cross-Examination in Rape Cases ‘Raises Constitutional Concerns’

, , /

JUDGE: Penn State’s Ban on Cross-Examination in Rape Cases ‘Raises Constitutional Concerns’

Public universities can’t deprive accused students the opportunity to challenge their accusers’ credibility in Title IX adjudications, a federal judge ruled last month in a closely watched lawsuit. Pennsylvania State University must consider how its educational mission will suffer if it “ejects innocent students who would  otherwise benefit from, and contribute to, its academic environment,” Judge Matthew Brann wrote in the memorandum opinion. Judge Brann said Penn State’s practice of conducting “paper-only” investigations – where the parties aren’t allowed to argue their case before a Title IX panel and challenge each other’s credibility – “raises constitutional concerns.” The ruling was cited in a recent Atlantic article on the Department of Education’s pending rulemaking on Title IX regulatory changes. It highlighted Brann’s statement that Penn State has an interest in “securing accurate resolutions of student complaints,” not just punishing guilty students.

thecollegefix.com By Maggie Malecki

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
JUSTICE & Campus Sex Assault…FACE Wants a Fair Process for Males. NAACP & ACLU Do Not.

, , , /

JUSTICE & Campus Sex Assault…FACE Wants a Fair Process for Males. NAACP & ACLU Do Not.

Harvard Law School Prof. Janet Halley, stated male students of color are accused and punished at “unreasonably high” rates. A prominent journalist noted that while black men make up about 6 percent of college undergraduates they are “vastly overrepresented” when it comes to being wrongly accused of sexual assault. Other observers have suggested  there’s “parallels between the treatment of Black men accused of rape during the infamous Jim Crow period and the adjudication of sexual assault cases in the current era.”

In the latest episode of Campus Roundup, we discuss this trend as well as the overall lack of due process for all males on campuses across the nation. The show features Cynthia Garrett, co-president of Families Advocating for Campus Equality.

…Personally I have attempted to speak with ACLU and NAACP representatives. So far, they are not interested in helping young males who are denied Title IX due process. My wish is that the NAACP & ACLU will stop being bullied by SJW’s and start defending due process for all citizens. -Alice

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
BETSY DeVOS TALKS: “It’s Time We Balance The Scales of Justice in Our Schools”

, , , /

BETSY DeVOS TALKS: “It’s Time We Balance The Scales of Justice in Our Schools”

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos recently wrote an opinion piece in the Washington Post. Here are some highlights from her article.

Last week, the Education Department released for public comment a proposed regulation regarding Title IX implementation. The rule would require schools to address sexual misconduct by assisting and protecting victims of sexual misconduct while affording due-process protections to those accused… No student should have their education unfairly derailed. That’s why there must be no tolerance for sexual harassment or assault in America’s schools — And there should also be no tolerance for adjudicating these matters in a way that denies to any person access to the core principles that underpin our justice system, such as due process. 

I have heard consistently that we can and must do better. A fair process treats each party with dignity and ensures the integrity of final decisions. This is why unbiased decision-makers need to objectively consider the testimony of both parties and other available evidence before reaching conclusions about what happened and what to do about it. Our proposed rule would require schools to apply basic due-process protections for students, such as the presumption of innocence, the right to know of allegations against them, the right to examine and challenge the evidence and the right to an unbiased decision-maker. That includes prohibiting the “single investigator” model, in which determinations are made by the same person who has investigated the case — a situation akin to a prosecutor also serving as a judge…Colleges and universities would also need to hold a live hearing in which cross-examination could be conducted by the parties’ advisers, even if that means putting the parties in separate rooms.

Some may mischaracterize our proposals as tilting the scales of justice, but we believe they simply balance them. Our proposed framework supports survivors while safeguarding due process, helping make Title IX protections against sex discrimination a reality for all students. Indeed, it is difficult to understand how people can object to procedures premised on the foundational concept of due process, or how anybody could have confidence in a system that lacks such protections.

To read DeVos’ full opinion piece go here: washingtonpost

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
BIG HUGE WIN for Male. CA Supreme Court Upholds Cross-Examination. Court Denies Claremont McKenna’s Request for Review.

, , , , , /

BIG HUGE WIN for Male. CA Supreme Court Upholds Cross-Examination. Court Denies Claremont McKenna’s Request for Review.

The California Supreme Court has ruled against the Los Angeles private college Claremont McKenna by upholding the unanimous female ruling by California Court of Appeals in favor of John Doe. On 8/8/18 the CA Court of Appeals found that Claremont McKenna College’s process was devoid of any opportunity to evaluate the credibility of the accuser who chose not to attend the TitleIX sexual misconduct hearing in person or remotely.  The Court of Appeals made it clear that in a “he said/she said” case, it is essential that the panel is able to directly assess the credibility of the accuser…This is a big solid legal win for cross-examination and college accused males. This means the 8/8/18 ruling by California Court of Appeal in favor of John Doe stands. This means that obnoxious Claremont McKenna College who fought against basic fairness for its own students lost.

And remember, a year ago California’s Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB169, refusing to codify 2011 Obama era guidelines. In vetoing SB169 Governor Brown stated, ‘accused students must be treated fairly and with the presumption of innocence’ 

The gifts of Title IX fair justice and due process continue. This month the Education Department rolled out proposed changes to Title IX guidelines. And according to Forbes, Newsweek, and many more media outlets, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos gets it right. The Title IX guidelines will restore balance and fairness to all students. 

SOS is extremely grateful to John Doe and his family, Govenor Brown, and Betsy DeVos.  In this climate of mis-guided SJW bullies, it takes great courage and strong resolve to remain persistant in the fight to uphold due process rights for all. -Alice

 

 

 

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
CYNTHIA GARRETT w FACE Supports New TIX Rules on NPR. “A Serious Serious Mental Trauma for People who are Falsely Accused.”

, , , , /

CYNTHIA GARRETT w FACE Supports New TIX Rules on NPR. “A Serious Serious Mental Trauma for People who are Falsely Accused.”

NPR’s Lakshmi Singh speaks with Cynthia Garrett, the co-president of Families Advocating for Campus Equality, who supports recently proposed changes to Title IX rules.

SINGH: In proposing a change to Title IX that would allow a defendant, for example, to cross-examine his or her accuser, we know that concerns have often been raised that this could retraumatize victims of sexual assault. Are you concerned about that at all?

GARRETT: I personally have never advocated for an accused or an accuser to directly cross-examine each other. And that’s not what the regs provide for. They allow a student’s advocate to question the opposing party.

SINGH: Does that not, still, retraumatize victims of sexual assault?

GARRETT: Well, you’re assuming they’re victims before they’ve been questioned. And, as you’ve probably heard, courts say cross-examination is the greatest legal engine ever created for determining the truth….

Is it fair to expel somebody based on something that the accuser refuses to be questioned about? Is that fair, really?…there’s a whole lot of misinformation or disinformation about the repercussions of these findings. We get calls almost every day. We have students that have been through these processes found not responsible and, five years later, are still so traumatized, they can’t go back to school. So this is not a game. This is a serious, serious mental trauma for people who are falsely accused.npr.org

WashingtonPost: DeVos “It’s Time We Balance the Scales of Justice in our Schools”

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
JUDGE RULES: UMichigan Violated Professor’s Right to Cross-Examine Accusers

, , /

JUDGE RULES: UMichigan Violated Professor’s Right to Cross-Examine Accusers

Pamela Smock, a tenured sociologist who studies “family, fertility, gender, demography, and sexuality,” was initially accused of inappropriate sexual speech by three graduate students under her supervision. They only accused Smock after the professor “gently confronted” one of them about her apparent plagiarism. Judge Tarnow ruled that only Smock’s due process claim against her dean, Andrew Martin, and Provost Martin Philbert would move forward. He made clear that UMich violated the precedent of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by not letting Smock cross-examine her accusers. “The Sixth Circuit very recently emphasized the importance of cross examination to university disciplinary proceedings,” the judge said, citing another ruling against the University of Michigan, albeit in the context of a student disciplinary proceeding. “Plaintiff’s inability to challenge her accusers’ credibility was complete: their identities were undisclosed.”

thecollegefix By Greg Piper.

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
«< 15 16 17 18 19 >»