Education Secretary Betsy DeVos announced Friday that the Education Department is rescinding the 2011 Obama-era ‘Dear Colleague’ letter, which offered guidance on how universities should handle sexual assaults under Title IX federal law.
The Department released a Q & A document comprised of guidelines and recommendations in order to aid schools handling sexual misconduct cases while the letter is under review.
Title IX is a federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual identity for schools and programs that receive federal funding, including protection from sexual harassment.
DeVos’ reasoning behind rescinding the letter was to introduce new policy on allowing due process for those accused, and argued that the investigation process needed a higher standard of proof when investigating these cases, according to a 2017 CNN article. DeVos said on Friday that students facing accusations are interrogated before being formally accused.
This higher standard of proof, otherwise known as “clear and convincing evidence,” according to the article, means that in order to pursue any disciplinary action, there must be clear evidentiary support against the accused.
In the 2011 letter, the standard of evidence was significantly lower and only required “preponderance of evidence.” The temporary guidelines allow the possibility for both parties to negotiate if willing, which was not supported in the 2011 letter.
Nina Anderson, Director of Equity and Diversity and Title IX Coordinator of the University, explained that rescinding the letter to create more concrete guidelines could be helpful for universities to have more structure in their procedures for handling cases of sexual misconduct.
“That letter is not getting where it needs to be, and all parties have rights in this situation,” Anderson said.
Anderson explained that the ‘Dear Colleague’ letter is completely up for interpretation by schools, and that while the letter isn’t necessarily aimed to condemn the accused, the way schools interpreted it can safeguard against that. “’Dear Colleague’ is not lopsided in the way we interpret it. We have our own policies to make sure both sides are receiving what they need,” she said.
“We strive for an equitable process for both the survivor and the accused,” she continued.
Anderson believes that having definitions would be helpful, even if every situation is different. “There is no federal definition for consent,” she added. “We would benefit from guidelines that have more structure, but also leave school’s to have room to interpret and create their own policies.”
Alyssa Cosentino, a senior psychology student, believes that changing these guidelines could be problematic for survivors looking to seek help and pursue a case. “It’s discouraging to those looking for help because they might not feel like their report is taken seriously if more evidence is being asked for. It can make victims of sexual assault feel less credible,” Cosentino said.
Dr. Johanna Foster, Ph.D., Director of the Sociology Program and assistant professor, agrees with the new guidelines’ potential to be damaging rather than helpful.
“As a sociologist of gender inequality, I am extremely disturbed by Betsy DeVos’ decision to rescind the Obama-era guidance on campus sexual assault. We should not be fooled into believing that DeVos is an educator, or a champion of due process,” Foster said.
“She is fundamentally an entrepreneur who supports the transformation of the educational system, including higher education, into a profit-making business for a particular sector of conservative elites to the extent that the faction of the elite that she represents are bent on rolling back the enormous gains of the modern women’s movement, her decision is not a surprise,” she continued.
Foster argues that the ‘Dear Colleague’ letter accomplished exactly what it was supposed to and that the standard of proof previously accepted was exactly what it should be.
Foster said, “The guidelines to colleges and universities to use a ‘preponderance of evidence’ was informed by 40 years of feminist movement activism in the U.S. that has fundamentally shaped the law, the courts, and law enforcement practices for the better.”
To revert to earlier practice is to dismantle almost a half century of anti-rape activism in the U.S.,” she said.
The current statements from the Q & A are meant to serve as a temporary set of guidelines while new Title IX regulation shaping is underway.
Dr. Joseph N. Patten, Chair of the Department of Political Science and Sociology and associate professor of political science believes that the changes are a mistake. “I think that it’s a dangerous thing to be removing protections against sexual assault. There are ways to be very proactive and still ensure safety without removing it,” Patten said.
In the meantime, the Department stated they would use “2001 revised Sexual Harassment Guidance” as well as a ‘Dear Colleague’ letter from 2006, according to a 2017 article from Politico.
Patten explained that the goal of ‘Dear Colleague’ was to emphasize that victims of sexual assault were being heard in a system that originally had the potential to overlook them. “Removing it sends the wrong signal that protecting sexual assault victims is not the priority,” Patten continued.
Officials could not say specifically when the action would be completed, however, estimated it would take several months. Whether schools will adopt the Q & A guidelines is completely in the discretion of the institution.
IMAGE TAKEN from NBC News
