The "Big Net" Approach To Due Process: If You're Accused, We'll Just Assume You're Guilty (Because Some Guy Must Be Guilty.)
No due process for you, college men!
Glenn Reynolds writes at USA Today:
Is Congress waging a war on college men? It's starting to look like it.Last week, Rep. Jared Polis, a Colorado Democrat, suggested that even innocent students should be booted from campus if they were accused of sexual assault. According to Polis: "If there are 10 people who have been accused, and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, it seems better to get rid of all 10 people."
So one of the longstanding traditions of American law -- that it is better to let 10 guilty men go free than to imprison one innocent -- has now been turned on its head. Under the Polis standard, it's basically the other way around.
According to Polis, it's not such a big deal: "We're not talking depriving them of life and liberty, we're talking about their transfer to another university, for crying out loud," Polis said, laughing off the idea that his suggestion would violate due process rights. He is not alone in taking the due process rights of the accused lightly, a widely-backed Democratic senate bill is just more circumspect.
But it's no laughing matter. A student with expulsion for sexual assault on his record will have great difficulty gaining admission to another college, with life-altering consequences. (If you don't believe that, then you don't think that college matters much, which is something I doubt higher education boosters want to maintain.) And even if he succeeds, the expulsion will affect his chances for employment for the rest of his life, too.
It's sick the way Polis acts like such injustice is no big deal -- and, in fact, a good thing.
Reynolds points out the perverse origins of this sickness:
The funny thing is that the law under which all of this is transpiring, the federal Title IX antidiscrimination law, is supposed to prevent the creation of just such a hostile educational environment based on sex. ("No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.") Yet -- seemingly with all calculation -- Jared Polis and his congressional colleagues seem eager to do just that.If any other minority were being treated this way -- and, on college campuses, men are very much a minority these days -- we would not hesitate to call that treatment discrimination, and to assume that it was rooted in prejudice and bigotry. So why has the war on college men gotten a pass?
If "...transfer to another university, for crying out loud" is no big deal, then it should equally be no big deal for women who make spurious accusations, like Emma Sulkowicz, to transfer to another university. Since being in the same university with her "rapist" caused her so much distress, it seems like the compassionate thing to do would have been to expel her on her way to a better place.
Ken R at September 15, 2015 2:18 AM
This guy have college age kids someone can accuse of sexual assault?
lujlp at September 15, 2015 2:38 AM
It is refreshing that one of them is being honest. After all, for all the gender neutral language this is what Title IX was designed for.
Ben at September 15, 2015 5:28 AM
"We're not talking depriving them of life and liberty, we're talking about their transfer to another university, for crying out loud."
As was pointed out: the other university received the Dear Colleague letter too.
"This guy have college age kids someone can accuse of sexual assault?"
Sons of wealthy and influential politicans are exempt. They're among the winners of the hypergamy game.
"If there are 10 people who have been accused, and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, it seems better to get rid of all 10 people."
Indeed. We can extend that principle to other areas. Some black people commit crimes. Better to put them all in jail! (Oh wait, we kind of already do that...)
Cousin Dave at September 15, 2015 6:34 AM
I live in Colorado, and have usually been pleased that Mr. Polis is a liberal with his feet on the ground, but he has clearly taken flight with this. He is gay, and has often spoken out in favor of rights for the oppressed, so I am very surprised by what he said. He has a long-time partner and two children, he may very well get his chance to eat these words.
bkmale at September 15, 2015 7:23 AM
Thank you for collecting these stories and spreading the word! I try and share to get the word out (without being a broken record about it). I have 2 young girls and while I am happy that they are encouraged and there is more care taken in their feelings, I don't want it to be at the expense of a generation of boys. Walking through the school library last week, my husband pointed out that the books on display were about 80% geared towards girls (fancy nancy, pinkalicious, etc), the rest were pretty gender neutral. We maybe saw 1 or 2 books that were geared towards boys specifically (and I say that as a mom of girls who like boy superhero books so I don't really think generally about boys books and girls books -- but fancy nancy are girls books for sure).
I am stunned that Moms of boys haven't staged a revolution! Are they so brainwashed that they think this stuff is OK too??? The girl power thing is great, but there needs to be some boy power too. What I want most is for my girls to grow up and date and partner with confident boys and men who are sensitive and caring but not submissive and afraid of stepping out of line: leaders who are not afraid to take charge when the situation needs it. Men, in other words. Will there be any I wonder?
chickia at September 15, 2015 7:27 AM
bkmale,
Why would you be surprised? Men can't be oppressed. Besides he's gay, and a State Representative, so he's a victim...of all the power...those cis-gendered male college students...have.
Or something.
The WolfMan at September 15, 2015 7:34 AM
Hillary Clinton's "you have a right to be believed" stance puts herself in a bad position, but no one in the media will ask her if she believes her husband is indeed a rapist as he has been accused.
I R A Darth Aggie at September 15, 2015 8:37 AM
Men, in other words. Will there be any I wonder?
There will, but they may very well have checked out of the market by that point. Men already are checking out of marriage as well as college. I wonder what it will be like in 10 years? I don't see it improving, or slowing down for that matter.
You plan to send your daughters to college? try to make sure they don't end up becoming brain washed misandrists who believe that every man is an untamed beast who desires nothing more than take them against their will.
And rack up some impressive student loan debt.
I R A Darth Aggie at September 15, 2015 8:42 AM
"He is gay, and has often spoken out in favor of rights for the oppressed, so I am very surprised by what he said. "
Oh God, another woman-worshipping gay man proving what a real man he is by protecting fragile, dainty, helpless women. What internalized homophobia. What self-hatred.
Jim at September 15, 2015 9:02 AM
Jim, you could be right. But I don't think so. I think it is more likely a manifestation of hostility for straight males hidden under cover of concern for women, with a dose of leftist virtue signaling for good measure.
Leftism is built upon the politicization of personal grievance. A fair serving of that exists on the right, of course. But the left would perish without it.
The WolfMan at September 15, 2015 9:26 AM
"If there are 10 people who have been accused, and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, it seems better to get rid of all 10 people"
Okay, let's also say:
"If there are 10 people who have made accusations, and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two are lying, it seems better to get rid of all 10 people."
After all, those women can simply transfer to another school; it should be no big deal.
What's good for the gander should also be good for the goose.
charles at September 15, 2015 9:59 AM
Soon, we will have come full circle. Caring patents won't let their sons spend time with girls, without a chaperone.
momof4 at September 15, 2015 11:36 AM
I have a suggestion. Take the accused, bind them hand foot and throw them in the river.
At least this way we don't just ship off an actual rapist to another college or university to continue preying on fellow classmates.
I R A Darth Aggie at September 15, 2015 1:30 PM
On this subject, Hillary Clinton has a rather disturbing tweet, which, evidently, she hasn't been sufficiently shamed into taking down.
She claims, falsely, that victims of sexual assault "have the right to be believed."
No, they don't, and unless she slept through Pre-Law 101, she knows this. No alleged victim of any crime has the right to be believed. They have the right to have their accusations taken seriously and investigated, but only the accused has the right to be believed...until proven otherwise.
That whole "innocent until proven guilty" shtick is evidently very troubling for Hillary. Not that I was going to vote for her in the first place, but if there ever was even a slight chance that I would have, she just killed it.
And as one of the cartoon responses to this Tweet indicates, Hillary apparently didn't extend this right to be believed to Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey.
Patrick at September 15, 2015 2:00 PM
You aren't nuanced enough Patrick. You know, the whole nuance of one rule for me and another for thee.
Ben at September 15, 2015 3:04 PM
If there are 534 Senators and Congressmen, and 54 of them might be conspiring to destroy our Constitutional rights, shouldn't we get rid of all of them? But actually, that's unnecessary. We know Polis wants to violate rights, and it is quite easy to find that most of Congress has voted to diminish our rights, again and again. Everyone who voted for drug laws. Everyone who voted to take away the right of free speech from people who joined together in the form of a corporation to publish political expressions that are outside of the personal budget of anyone not super-rich.
markm at September 28, 2015 7:13 PM
Leave a comment