90 likes | 196 Vues
This presentation by Professor Peter Lake explores the intersection of Title IX compliance, due process rights, and First Amendment considerations in higher education. Addressing current regulatory challenges and Supreme Court interpretations, Professor Lake discusses the implications of recent mandates, evidentiary issues, and the evolving landscape of college sexual assault adjudication. He highlights the ongoing debates about fairness, jurisdiction, and the boundaries of institutional responsibility in creating equitable adjudication processes for alleged violations.
E N D
Compliance and the Constitution in Conflict: Title IX, Due Process and the First Amendment Professor Peter Lake Charles A. Dana Chair, Director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law & Policy, Stetson Univ. College of Law 2014 Campus Safety and Violence Prevention Forum
Due Process Challenges • Compliance with 4/4/11 Dear Colleague Letter (DCL), et seq. (Montana and Yale Resolutions, SaVE Act) • Rectifying Regulatory Mandates with: • Supreme Court Interpretation of Title IX • Due Process • State Contract Rights Requirements • State Administrative Procedure Acts (APA) • Heading for Process Battles in the Courts
Challenges of Complying with Regulatory Mandates: Creating College Sexual Assault “Courts” • Impartiality Tenure? • Lawyers • Appeals • Standard of Proof • Title IX standard in court? • A change for some IHE’s. • “New” mandate? • Enhanced Enforcement by Depts. of Ed. and Justice • Expectation of More Enforcement by Colleges • Evidentiary Issues • “Consent” • Withdrawals in Advance of Adjudication • False Accusations • “Jurisdiction” • On/off campus • Responsibilities under Title IX, but no grant of jurisdiction per se
The U.S. Supreme Court on Title IX Private Enforcement • Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School Dist., 524 U.S. 274 (1998). • Davis v. Monroe County Bd. of Ed., 526 U.S. 629 (1999).
College “Courts” and Due Process • Will the U.S. Supreme Court finally provide college due process mandate? • Brief history and myths of college due process: • Dixon v. Alabama, 294 F. 2d 150 (5th Cir. 1961). • Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975). • Bd. of Curators of Univ. of Missouri v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78 (1978). • Regents of Univ. of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (1985). • Kent State and Codes • Protected interests of life, liberty, property • Liberty = Reputation • Sexual assault :: reputational injury • State Action
College “Courts” and Due Process (cont’d) • Mathews v. Eldridge • Substantive/Procedural Due Process • The Title IX college court model does not provide criminal due process protections: • Evidence • Jury • Confrontation • Discovery • Burden of Proof • Right to Counsel • Impartial judiciary • Investigations
College “Courts” and Contract Rights • Handbooks/Codes • “Substantial Fairness” • McCormick et al. v. Brown University et al. • Brown Univ. asked to supply donor records • John Doe v. Sewanee: The University of the South • Jury awarded $26,500 to student. Sewanee found negligent in handling of disciplinary hearing and investigative process. • Honor Systems • Centralized Command
College “Courts” and State Administrative Procedure Acts (APAs) • Some states require compliance with state APA • Potentially inconsistent mandates • Federal supremacy? • Consult counsel
Thank You! Join me for a further discussion: We Can Do Title IX Compliance Better Than You!