Department of Education

Proposed Campus Crime Rules Require Reporting of Stalking, Dating Violence; Expand Hate Crime Categories

|

Vtn5n/Wikimedia

The U.S. Education Department has released new draft rules for how colleges must handle campus sexual assault cases and some other crimes. It's part of an ongoing effort from the Obama administration to make less of a mess of the "campus rape crisis." 

Released yesterday, the proposed rules are part of efforts to implement the 2013 Campus Sexual Violence Elimination (SaVE) Act, an update on the Jeanne Clery Act of 1990. The Clery act established for the first time that colleges must disclose information about crime on campus if they want to participate in federal student financial aid programs.

The Clery Act is one of two federal laws governing how schools must respond to reports of sexual assault, explains the Christian Science Monitor. 

The other key law is Title IX, which bans sex discrimination and requires action on sexual violence and harassment because they interfere with victims' access to equal education. The Education Department has taken a number of steps in recent years to strengthen those aspects of Title IX.

The new Clery Act rules are open for public comment until July 21, with final rules scheduled for Nov. 1. Here are some of their key components: 

  • Require colleges and universities to report annual statistics on dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking, in addition to sexual assault.
  • Define sexual assault as "an offense that meets the definition of rape, fondling, incest, or statutory rape." 
  • Change the definition of "rape" to match the FBI's current definition, so it now will include sodomy and sexual assault with an object.
  • Define "hate crime" to mean a crime "that manifests evidence that the victim was intentionally selected because of the perpetrator's bias" against the victim based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disability status and, now, gender identity or national origin. 
  • Provide domestic violence and sexual assault complainants with a written explanation of their rights and options. 
  • Establish "comprehensive, intentional, and integrated programming, initiatives, strategies, and campaigns intended to end dating violence, domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking that are culturally relevant, inclusive of diverse communities and identities, sustainable, responsive to community needs, and informed by research or assessed for value, effectiveness, or outcome."
  • Require colleges to submit an annual report on their procedures for institutional disciplinary action in cases of alleged dating violence, domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking.

For the most part, it seems like the Education Department is merely setting up additional hoops for schools to jump through, with a few possibly more significant changes. The department declined to weigh in on the meaning of sexual consent, as "several negotiators strongly urged." Though earlier draft regulations had included language similar to those currently being considered in California, the agency has since removed it.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

44 responses to “Proposed Campus Crime Rules Require Reporting of Stalking, Dating Violence; Expand Hate Crime Categories

  1. Define “hate crime” to mean a crime “that manifests evidence that the victim was intentionally selected because of the perpetrator’s bias” against the victim based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disability status and, now, gender identity or national origin.

    So does this mean the universities now have to report all their own violations of civil rights against people who are white and/or male and/or american as hate crimes? Because that would be funny.

    1. “the victim”

      There’s your answer right there. Priviledged white male straight cis-shitlords can’t ever be victims.

      1. Also. If (and only if) you’re a straight white male, intent is assumed and there is no valid defense of your intent.

  2. What could go wrong..

  3. This is a very productive use of my tax dollars.

  4. Provide domestic violence and sexual assault complainants with a written explanation of their rights and options.

    What about the accused and his/her rights?

    1. Right to face their accuser? Golly, no, the accuser might be too delicate to handle that.

      Right to a jury trial? Sorry, this is a school, we have a single administrator who will just say you’re guilty and expel you.

  5. Can’t say you weren’t warned…

    “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” ? Barack Obama, October 30, 2008.

  6. This is where title-nine is going to bite them in the ass. How much you wanna bet they’ll treat female stalkers different from male stalkers? Get you popcorn ready.

    1. That’s because they are victims of the patriarchy. So… Duh!

  7. this is from The Nation’s story linked to early about a woman claiming victimhood: “Because she knew him and had been very drunk both times,…” Full fucking stop.

    If you are drunk off your ass, why should I take seriously that a guy you knew raped you? Twice. Claims like that cheapen genuine cases of assault and they make a mockery of what rape is, i.e. not a sex thing but a power thing.

    I am so glad to not be part of the generation that is being marinated in this sort of sophistry where every male is painted as a predator. Relations among young men and women can be awkward enough without criminalizing every interaction between them. Yeah, this ends well.

    1. “what rape is, i.e. not a sex thing but a power thing.”

      I would say using illegal violence to get sex, as robbery is using illegal violence to get money.

    2. Declaring all drunk sex to be rape is very problematic. Taking advantage of someone who is incoherent or passed out would certainly be rape, but the fact is that people, both male and female, often deliberately go out with the intention of getting drunk and finding someone to fuck. Declaring that one can’t consent when drunk just makes a common activity among college aged people potentially criminal.

      1. Certainly if no force/coersion is involved and you were an ACTIVE participant, you were not raped.

        1. I would add that if you are the type that just lays there during sex and you are concious and able to speak and you don’t want to have sex you have an obligation to speak up. If you think this is going to be a problem for you, you need to let the other person know that up front before you get to that point.

      2. I would say that’s less true of women than men, but I agree that it’s a gray area.

        1. You’ve never been to a male strip club on hen night.

          1. I haven’t been to a male strip club, period. I have been to female strip clubs though and I know that guys don’t need to get a group together and get drunk to want to fuck randoms.

            1. (nttawwt)

  8. Creating criminal law seems like a legit function of the Department of Education.

    1. Of course it is. Now they will need their very own SWAT team to enforce it.

        1. “and their own court system!”

          Probably the hopping kind.

          http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n…..86273b.jpg

        2. “and their own court system!”

          Probably the hopping kind.

          http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n…..86273b.jpg

        3. Hop, hop.

  9. What about bear on human violence? Why won’t the system take it seriously?

    Ladonna Merriman, 44, and Lucas Gringas, 28, both of Milton reported a bear attack Wednesday afternoon in the woods off Clay Ridge Road in Milton. The police “could not substantiate” the claim that animals attacked the pair.

    http://www.burlingtonfreepress…../10997619/

    1. Officials found evidence of a person going over a steep ledge and landing on trees and rocks below. They concluded that Merriman and Gringas were not attacked by a bear.

      Oh, ok, then.

  10. btw how can they accurately report anything when the definitions are so vague they literally include any act of intimacy? this whole thing is so farcical, and is going to be used as a bludgeon against schools whose research doesn’t reach the conclusions that coincide with the politics with party in charge.

  11. What was that Iowahawk quote again?

    “If I understand college administrators correctly, colleges are hotbeds of racism and rape that everyone should be able to attend.”

  12. Define sexual assault as “an offense that meets the definition of rape, fondling, incest, or statutory rape.”

    “fondle, v. To handle, stroke, or caress lovingly.”

    Better change that to “groping” toot sweet.

    1. You know, I didn’t even catch that, but that is a very bizarre way to put it.

    2. Incest? What. The. Fuck.

      No seriously, is that REALLY a problem on college campuses?

  13. I can understand wanting some reporting of crime statistics and some “how to behave when you are on your own” training, but what is up with the punishment requirements? Here’s a novel idea: let’s let law enforcement people enforce the law.

    That whole bit about having students report crimes to university officials instead of police is where the problem started in the first place. Let the police handle it and just get a report from the local sheriff’s office every year.

    Of course then you have the whole problem of “campus police” and possible problems with police abuses, but at least you’ve removed incentives for academic people to cover up crimes, or to punish non-existent crimes.

    1. That has always seemed odd to me as well. Why should college administration have anything to do with the reporting or punishment for criminal assaults?

      1. Why should college administration have anything to do with the reporting or punishment for criminal assaults?

        Did not former Penn state University President Graham Spanier prove that his administration is quite capable of handling allegations of rape without involving the police?

  14. “that manifests evidence that the victim was intentionally selected because of the perpetrator’s bias”

    Prove it.

    1. “Just *look* at him, Your Honor! He’s *obviously* biased against, uh, those people!”

  15. Establish “comprehensive, intentional, and integrated programming, initiatives, strategies, and campaigns intended to end dating violence, domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking that are culturally relevant, inclusive of diverse communities and identities, sustainable, responsive to community needs, and informed by research or assessed for value, effectiveness, or outcome” MORE JOBS.

    FTFY

  16. In other words, don’t have sex on campus. Do these rukes apply to community colleges?

  17. What about the accused and his/her rights?

    You’re just being obtuse.

  18. Fuck this administration. The only scandals they pay attention to are the made-up ones.

    1. That’s because all those others are FAKE Scandals.

    2. That’s because all those others are FAKE Scandals.

  19. Armed women don’t get raped.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.