Obama's Mentor, Harvard Law Profs Blast New Sex Harassment Policies


Harvard University
Wikimedia Commons

Some of Harvard's top law professors are no fans of the university's new sexual harassment policy, and have penned an op-ed for The Boston Globe stating their concerns.

Harvard debuted a new sexual harassment policy this year in response to pressure from the federal Office of Civil Rights. But the policy—which broadens the definition of sexual harassment and gives one university office sole power in adjudicating disputes—vastly exceeds the scope of federal law, according to 28 members of the Harvard Law School faculty. They write:

As teachers responsible for educating our students about due process of law, the substantive law governing discrimination and violence, appropriate administrative decision-making, and the rule of law generally, we find the new sexual harassment policy inconsistent with many of the most basic principles we teach. We also find the process by which this policy was decided and imposed on all parts of the university inconsistent with the finest traditions of Harvard University, of faculty governance, and of academic freedom.

Harvard has adopted procedures for deciding cases of alleged sexual misconduct which lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process, are overwhelmingly stacked against the accused, and are in no way required by Title IX law or regulation.

The professors recommend scrapping the entire policy and starting over again. They accept that this could get the university in trouble with the feds, but Harvard is fully capable of taking a stand against unjust federal mandates, they write:

We recognize that large amounts of federal funding may ultimately be at stake. But Harvard University is positioned as well as any academic institution in the country to stand up for principle in the face of funding threats. The issues at stake are vitally important to our students, faculties, and entire community.

Prominent legal commentator Alan Dershowitz is among the op-ed's signatories. So is Charles Ogletree, who is considered to have been one of President Obama's mentors. Read the full thing here.

On a related note, The New Republic recently asked "feminist and public defender" Robin Steinberg to evaluate Columbia University's similarly strident anti-harassment policy. After reviewing the policy, Steinbeg and her colleagues decided that they would never send their sons to college:

A few hours later, Steinberg wrote back in alarm. She had read the document with colleagues at the Bronx legal-aid center she runs. They were horrified, she said—not because Columbia still hadn't sufficiently protected survivors of assault, as some critics charge, but because its procedures revealed a cavalier disregard for the civil rights of people accused of rape, assault, and other gender-based crimes. "We are never sending our boys to college," she wrote.

More from Reason on the debate over campus sex and due process here.

NEXT: Michelle Obama Turns Down for Turnip

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Fuck ’em

    1. Harvard Law has joined the War on Women!

    2. So you WANT Harvard males to be subjected to unfair disciplinary procedures?

    1. The one saving grace about progs and SJWs is that they are insane and obsessed, so they always go too far and cause a backlash. Because they can’t stop; they’re too obsessed. If they were more nuanced they’d be vastly more dangerous.

      1. The one saving grace about progs and SJWs is that they are insane and obsessed, so they always go too far and cause a backlash.

        I’m not sure I’d call this evidence of such. A nastygram from Harvard Law hardly constitutes a “backlash” when the majority of universities are in the process of adopting similar policies at the behest of the government.

      2. I am pretty sure there was one hell of a backlash in Cambodia against Pol Pot. Pot most certainly took things too far and suffered for it. I am not sure I find much comfort in that however.

    2. Harvard males are the ones who will be hoisted not these guys.

  2. Inhale deeply, then laugh. Repeat until mood improves.

  3. I really am lucky. I have been able to stay just ahead of the wave of bullshit washing over this country. I grew up when I could play outside. Went to college before you had to ask permission to do anything. Was able to get a job before the economy collapse. Bought a house after the housing market bust. I just need my luck to hold out another 30 years.

    1. Yeah, this. My girls are done with college – my son is a sophomore.

      The shit he CAN’T DO that we totally did….how does the poor kid have any fun? Somehow they manage, but it’s a LOT more work….and there’s always a sword of Damocles over their heads from the Derp Patrol.

      I missed all that…thank goodness!

      1. I just missed it as well. Just.

        1. I didn’t think there was ever a time when Canadians had fun.

    2. You and me both, Florida Man. You and me both.

  4. I still get baffled that due process gets basically thrown out the window with these new harassment laws. It’s relieving I suppose that Harvard LAW SCHOOL decided this was a bridge too far, but it’s pretty sad that so many others decided to let it pass.

    1. The fact that this concerns you concerns me. I’ll be reporting you to the Internal College Affairs Czar. I’ll be recommending re-education…just so you know…

      1. Oh yeah? Well I’ll have you know that I am outraged and offended that you are concerned about my concerns.

        I’m reporting you to the Red Tony Sarcasm police. Expect to be whipped with a wet noodle by Gene Simmons at dawn.

      2. “I was going to report Tman, but I saw that Almanian! already did it and I did not want to waste the Commissar’s valuable time.”

        1. I’ll have to turn in TMWC for observing a flagrant concern trolling and failing to turn it in to ‘the Proper Authorities’.

          The Authority is not interested in your petty quibbling. Only The Authority gets to decide what is a waste of his/her/zis time.

    2. Why are you baffled? Politically, almost any advocates of “procedural” (i.e. civil procedure, criminal procedure, political structure/federalism) law are political losers, and the people who want to steamroll procedural law are the political winners. If you and your team are winning at the ballot box, chances are that you’re either going to be transferring money to yourselves or attacking something/someone that is a “threat” to you. Only someone who is losing politically has a strong motive to advocate for procedure which holds up and slows down government action. Back when the drug war was riding high, the right sure as hell was willing to erode criminal procedure in order to get those evil druggies. Now that the proggies are doing better at the ballot box than they did in the 1980s, of course they’re throwing out what vestiges of respect they once had for procedural law. Why would they support procedural law, which just holds up their desired outcomes? The winners just want their free shit and to attack the infidels.

      1. There’s a chance that if they really alienate Greenwald-type civil libertarians, they’ll start to drift away from the left alliance. Progressives hate civil libertarians, but they can’t say that because their PR depends on them.

        Obviously, I’m rooting for the day when Greenwald says “I’m not a Democrat anymore because they hate your rights as much as the Republicans,” but even for a guy like him, it’s got to be hard.

  5. I’d love to hear Harvard students having sex. “Deepah, hardah, longah!”

    Wait, did I just type that?

    1. I’m a little turned on.

      1. Their anti-rape police used to be, “put that thing away, Brad, or I’ll call Daddy and he’ll make a few calls and you won’t get that investment banking job.”

      2. Their anti-rape police used to be, “put that thing away, Brad, or I’ll call Daddy and he’ll make a few calls and you won’t get that investment banking job.”

    2. Pahk yah cah in Hahvahd Yahd! Then get yah ass tah my room and fahck me hahd!

      1. “I believe I shall visit my summer home in Portland, Maine with my fiancee, and then I am going to Bangor.”

    3. Are Harvard students required to adopt a Boston accent now?

  6. Hey! I wanted to comment on the illegal tv show downloads and it disappeared! Reason is in biiiiig trouble

  7. At some point all the male-cleansing will turn to bite the feminist brigades in the asses; none of them will be worth marrying or making children with. The average male loses nothing.

    Children are great but a shit-ton of work. Wives are great only if you get lucky in the long run. Adding complex pre-marital fucking mechanisms into the mix WILL cause the rational male to adjust and, accordingly, invent or be far more open to alternative lifestyles, approaches, or technologies that may or may not include actual women.

    1. Are we talking robosexuals. If so you have my attention

      1. I seriously cannot wait for the first release of the fembot 3000 customizeable and fully upgradable sexbot. Not because I want one, but because I can’t wait to watch the feminazis heads explode.

        1. They’ll be too busy with RoboClooney to care.

          1. We could only wish. 1000 Clooneybots will not make them stop their screeching.

            1. Baby, while I’m eating you out, I want you to tell me all about the funny things Amanda Marcotte said about the Gamergaters. Nothing in the world could make me more turned on, do you knBZZT FATAL ERROR IMPLAUSIBILITY PARAMETERS EXCEEDED PLEASE REBOOT YOUR CLOONEYBOT AND RESTORE FACTORY SETTINGS

              1. So, you’re saying that Microsoft is making the Clooneybot?

                1. The rumors that the Apple iBang’s cock is modeled on Jonny Ive’s are probably false.

            2. Fembot 3000 = complex pre-marital fucking mechanism?

              1. How ’bout a beautiful and thin version of Andrea Dworkin? I’d call it the Dworkin XL and when you shot your load the sexbot would scream in Dworkin’s voice, “I love your baby porridge, Master!”

                1. Not gonna lie. This comment scared me. A lot.

        2. The feminazis will lobby to have them made illegal.

          1. Not sure if you’re joking, but that’s actually exactly what will happen.

            1. Not joking; I wish I were.

              1. They just need some reasonable software that requires that the user get affirmative consent on paper before using the sexbot, or it will notify the police.

                We can’t have men developing bad habits.

                1. Needless to say, all fleshlights will have have to be retrofitted.

        3. Fembots are degrading toward women and encourage rape culture, just like everything else, including gay porn.

          1. Well, let the luddites get their pitchforks and take to the streets to kill the evul sexbots, should be pretty funny.

          2. I see no viable reason why a sexbot cannot be raped at will or after supper. A will they do not have.

        4. I seriously cannot wait for the first release of the fembot 3000 customizeable and fully upgradable sexbot.

          This Machine is seriously intrigued.

  8. OT but Ebola patient number one was on a flight the day before she came down with a fever.

    DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) ? The CDC has announced that the second healthcare worker diagnosed with Ebola ? now identified as Amber Joy Vinson of Dallas ? traveled by air Oct. 13, the day before she first reported symptoms.
    The CDC is now reaching out to all passengers who flew on Frontier Airlines flight 1143 Cleveland to Dallas/Fort Worth. The flight landed at 8:16 p.m. CT.
    The CDC is asking all 132 passengers on the flight to call 1 800-CDC INFO (1 800 232-4636). Public health professionals will begin interviewing passengers about the flight after 1 p.m. ET.
    Vinson first reported a fever on Tuesday (Oct. 14) and was isolated within 90 minutes, according to officials. She did not exhibit symptoms while on the Monday flight, according to crew members.
    “Risk to that individual would have been extremely low,” says Dr. Tom Frieden, Director of the CDC.

    All is well!

    1. Cleveland. Always letting people down.

      1. Will the Browns be her pallbearers?

  9. Adding complex pre-marital fucking mechanisms into the mix WILL cause the rational male to adjust…

    There’s your problem. People are not rational about sex. Now, I’ve known men who were completely incapable of attracting women and rationalized this by saying that they (the men) were actually not trying to attract women. I’ve met very few men who actually could attract women and who avoided them anyways (And these guys had usually gone through at least a couple horrible relationships before they adopted this attitude).

    1. I’ve met very few men who actually could attract women and who avoided them anyways

      Yes, but you can still avoid the bat shit crazy ones. Just do internet dating and talk to them for a while. The first mention of any SJW babble, run!!!

      I mean, really, all dateable women are not batshit insane.

    2. True enough in the collective sense, except pressure forces societal adjustments. Men are under a new kind of pressure that lies way outside rational, traditional, and intelligent parameters.

      I simply see this as creating the emergence of a class of men that are far more skeptical of the average woman. It is likely this group of men will be your thinkers, inventors, alphas, and so on… the guys women really want to make children with.

  10. After reviewing the policy, Steinbeg and her colleagues decided that they would never send their sons to college:

    Any young man who attends one of these colleges with such a policy as this, is very naive and foolish. Young men should just boycott all schools who have insane policies like this and see what the organizations think about that. Then the next thing you know the SJWs will want laws passed to force young men to attend their havens of insanity. When that fails, they’ll try to have laws passed to force young men to date them. Well, at least make them talk to me, why don’t any men want to talk to me, wahhh!!!

    1. Colleges have become suicidal. At the same time when technology and new players in the market give people better and cheaper choices for education they choose to become an even worse option than they were before.

      1. I think it’s Peter Thiel that is giving money away for people to skip college and start a business instead. Can’t remember the name of the program right now, but the proggies and universities are pretty pissed about it.

    2. Here’s what I think will actually happen. Things will pretty much go on as they have. Very few young men will be affected directly by the new rules and college students will continue getting drunk and fucking each other. A few will get royally fucked over by the rules and a few people will protest, but most people will not care or assume that they had it coming anyway. It will be like so many other horrible policies that are not quite horrible enough for people to inconvenience themselves by seriously protesting. Much like TSA airport security.

      1. Much like TSA airport security.

        …where the government can grope you against your will and receive a high-five from the majority of the public because they feelz safe.

  11. Progressives wake to world they created, find it horrifying
    – Film @ 11

    1. Just wait until some of these progtards like Ezra Klein are the direct victim of shit like this. I can just hear it now ‘But, wait! Umm, hey, this wasn’t supposed to effect me! I’m innocent!’

      1. Klein strikes me as exactly the kind of guy who’ll get nailed by this. Not so hideous that he’ll be consigned to 24/7 videogaming, but kind of dorky/mousy, and certainly not a golden boy when it comes to raw sex appeal. The sort of guy that might seem like a good idea after 5 or 6 tequila shots.

        1. Klein strikes me as exactly the kind of guy who’ll get nailed by this

          Finally, some social justice that we can all believe in!

  12. Harvard Law has 246 faculty members. 28 of them, just over 11% of them, have a problem with throwing away due process rights.

    I guess we shouldn’t be too surprised. Who set the framework. Who set the assumptions.

    1. 28 of them, just over 11% of them, have a problem with throwing away due process rights

      Those are the ones that want to nail their students. Besides that, I’m sure they are just as willing to go full on totalitarian over any issue. You don’t survive in places like that unless you’re a far lefty.

  13. This is so hilarious.

    College Campuses were the place that “Growing Adults” could snobbishly look at the autocratic policies their preachers and parents put them under in society. They fought against those “outdated” morals and customs, breaking down rules in their colleges about dorm chaperone policies, fraternization rules and other rules that treated them like children.

    If I were addressing college kids today, I’d tell them “Get your sex now kids, because in a decade universities will be sex free.” It is the only logical conclusion to this entire circus. They keep handing power to university campuses with the expectation that they will be “protected”. Well, the best way for the university to protect them during sex is to remove it as an option.

    So in 10 years, I fully expect to see Universities just as morally uptight about sex and drinking (i.e. get suspended or expelled if caught) as they were in the 50s. Just with a bunch of liberal dogma replacing the What Would Jesus Do texts.

    1. Yep, the progs are just as bad as the worst puritans that ever lived, maybe worse. It’s the New Puritanism.

      1. I really thought that more millennials would resist this kind of fundamentalism. We were raised on tolerance as a core value, and got to see how well it works though internet culture. And now that the progs are in charge, they say “Actually, we just meant that you were supposed to tolerate US,” no one bats an eye?

        1. The problem is that they’ve been conditioned their entire life to join in group think. Now dear leader wants them into the indoctrination camps by the time they’re 3.

        2. We were raised on tolerance as a core value…

          Hate to break it to you, but no, no you weren’t. Your generation was raised on approval for things that were previously taboo as a core value. The two are different. And the distinction is why the progs have been able to push the “we just meant that you were supposed to tolerate US” line.

          1. Your generation was raised on approval for things that were previously taboo as a core value.

            See left-anarchists for more details.

        3. We were raised on safety as our true core value, trumping all others. “Let’s get drunk and make some bad decisions” is inherently a little bit unsafe, so we must destroy campus sex in order to create a new, safe, tightly-regulated system of fucking.

          1. I am not saying you are wrong, but if you are right, I weep for your generation and pray God forgives mine for what we have done to you. We basically robbed you of the joys of youth.

            1. Fuckin’ martyr! Penned with love.

          2. There’s something to that, too, but it applies more to post-9/11 millennials. If you’re 30, you have no excuse.

    2. Somehow I see the future campuses banning M-F PIV sex, but all gay and lesbian sex will not only be permitted but embraced. There will be no possibility of date rape or domestic violence in any of these permitted cases, as none of these involves straight men.

      1. That is right. Men are ass raped by other men by the hundreds of thousands in America’s prisons. That fact is of course the height of comedy. Everyone loves a prison ass rape joke. Let even a single top shelf white girl get drunk and have a hookup she later regrets, and God damn it that is a national security issue requiring that the repeal of the Constitution. The Constitution is not a suicide pact buddy.

        1. Everyone loves a prison ass rape joke.

          Rape is not OK and it’s just fucking awful but to be fair, John, free speech has plenty of room for rape jokes- whether on the ladies, the bro’s, or the prisoners.

          1. yes, there is room for rape jokes of all kinds. I am an equal opportunity rape joker. It is just some other people are not. And that is my point.

      2. All straight sex will have to be filmed and monitored closely by university administrators to ensure affirmative consent. No fatties or uggos.

  14. Not really going to weigh in on the article, but I loved this one guy in the comments:

    This is comical coming from a woman. Women’s tremendous sexual power has been downplayed both by Lefty feminists and the other side, the conservative women.

    Translation: I can’t get laid.

    When was the last time anyone saw a woman pursue a man, buy him gifts, do all kinds of crap as part of the courtship process, even go down on a knee to ask him to marry her?

    Translation: I’m a “nice guy” (huge pussy) and I can’t get laid.

    When was the last time any one saw a woman bust her ass 60 hours a week and earn enough status to attract men of lower-status?

    Translation: I got promoted to assistant manager at the comic book store and I can’t get laid.

    1. I would say that about 99% of feminist screeching about social justice and 99% of men who blather on about the same come down to exactly that ‘I can’t get laid’.

      1. I think there’s truth to that. On both extremes there’s a huge sense of entitlement and the false idea of some claim on the other side.

        1. If you read feminists like Marcotte and such, they always seem to be deeply broken people who are angry at the world for not recognizing their self perceived genius.

          1. Yeah, but that pretty much describes anyone with an internet connection and some spare time.

            1. I perceive SusanM is in the mood to be kickin’ some collective interweb ass this eve.

            2. Fuck you for not recognizing the genius of my comment Susan.

    2. The status stuff is a dead giveaway for him being a PUA devotee.

      1. This guy is just a Supreme Gentleman. Why don’t women recognize that?

        1. Nothing says attractiveness like insecurity combined with a sense of entitlement.

          1. You mean insecurity bound tightly behind the iron curtain of the sense of entitlement, perhaps?

            1. Yes. I feel bad for guys like this. Even if they do get a girlfriend, she is likely to be straight off the pages of Jezebel. What chance does a guy like this have?

              1. These guys also tend to be massive dicks who attract extremely pretty hot messes only an insane male would want around.

      2. You are just mad you are not an Alpha.

        1. I’m so Alpha, I make your hamster spin.

          1. Warty convinced Episiarch that as long as you were with a high status top being a power bottom made you an alpha.

    3. Your buddy needs a dash of reality methinks…

    4. When was the last time any one saw a woman bust her ass 60 hours a week and earn enough status to attract men of lower-status?

      That is my favorite part. I have known a ton of guys who busted their asses to get ahead and had fat or homely wives. Unless you plan to pay by the hour, status doesn’t necessarily get you hot women. It never hurts but its utility is subject to diminishing returns.

      1. So you’re saying lower-status women are the fat or homely ones? You made me chuckle.

        1. Only when they get older and can’t afford the right makeup and a gym membership like the rich girls can.

    5. Women’s tremendous sexual power has been downplayed both by Lefty feminists and the other side, the conservative women.

      That isn’t true?

      1. I thought conservative women embraced the sexual power of women? Seriously, the whole get married and breed thing.

      2. Tremendous sexual power is an untruth to be sure.

        1. Its like a force of incredible magnitude. Women are building a tremendous sexual power and will rule the world with it.

          1. If jiggly titties and pink palaces actually ruled the world and existence was peaceful and idyllic I’d be all for it.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.