MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

The Dumb Liberal Opposition to Betsy DeVos' Campus Sexual Assault Rules

The Obama-era rules had a disparate impact on minority men

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos' proposed revamp of Obama's Title IX campus sexual assault rules has liberal feminists up in arms. But that's becauseSexIngram Publishing via newscom they are putting their feminism ahead of their liberalism. If they weren't, they'd realize that these rules made a mockery of elementary due process rights of the accused. And when liberal protections are ditched, the biggest losers are minorities, in this case minority men who are being disproportionately targeted. As Emily Yoffe argued in The Atlantic:

[A]s the definition of sexual assault used by colleges has become broader and blurrier, it certainly seems possible that unconscious biases might tip some women toward viewing a regretted encounter with a man of a different race as an assault. And as the standards for proving assault have been lowered, it seems likely that those same biases, coupled with the lack of resources common among minority students on campus, might systematically disadvantage men of color in adjudication, whether or not the encounter was interracial…

In a 2015 Harvard Law Review article, "Trading the Megaphone for the Gavel in Title IX Enforcement," she [Janet Halley] writes, "American racial history is laced with vendetta-like scandals in which black men are accused of sexually assaulting white women," followed eventually by the revelation "that the accused men were not wrongdoers at all." She writes that "morning-after remorse can make sex that seemed like a good idea at the time look really alarming in retrospect; and the general social disadvantage that black men continue to carry in our culture can make it easier for everyone in the adjudicative process to put the blame on them." She has observed the phenomenon at her own university: "Case after Harvard case that has come to my attention, including several in which I have played some advocacy or adjudication role, has involved black male respondents."

Another Ivy League law professor who has been involved in sexual-assault policy said to me of the issue of race, "Nobody wants to talk about it." He said students are pushing their boundaries and that many hook up with a partner of a different ethnicity for the first time. But then, "if there is any kind of perceived injury—emotional or physical—when you cross racial lines, there's likely to be more animus. It needs to be talked about and hasn't been."

DeVos' reforms would address such disparate impact by giving the schools the option of embracing higher evidentiary standards, requiring them to offer the accused an opportunity for appeal and cross examination etc.

The reforms, I note in my column at The Week, are not perfect, but they are on the right track. And if liberals could look past the flawed leader she represents, they'd see that (actually, maybe they won't given that no amount of intersectionality can ultimately overcome identity politics that derives an agenda not from broad universal principles but tribal identity politics).

Go here to read the piece.

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.

  • Braaap!||

    "The Obama-era rules had a disparate impact on minority men"

    Ftfy.

  • ||

    At first, I thought Robby misspelled his name. But, looking at features like the one you use and the niche/narrow use of the term 'liberal', I'm convinced it's a Dalmia piece. It's a good mask, but a couple of the crazy warts still peek out through the cracks.

  • ||

    That's the first thing I noticed.

    Then I saw the author.

  • Red Tony||

    "The Dumb Liberal" by Shikha Dalmia.

    You know, I always did want to read her autobiography.

  • Eddy||

    Quick, expel some more white and Asian students!

  • Brandybuck||

    But no the white affluent east coast elite liberals. We still need them to set the liberal agenda.

  • Bearded Spock||

    It would have been a good article if Shikha hadn't spent two or three paragraphs reminding everyone how much she hates Trump.

    Even when the Trump Administration does something Reason can't stop the Virtue Signal.

    If Trump ever succeeds in legalizing pot on the state level, at least half of the H&R post about it will be a tedious rehash of all the bad things Trump has done.

  • Bearded Spock||

    *does something right

  • ||

    It would have been a good article if Shikha hadn't spent two or three paragraphs reminding everyone how much she hates Trump.

    Too soon. Wait for the third reprinting of this piece, after she's retconned in the anti-Trump and pro-immigration angles.

  • ||

    My bad, you meant the article from The Week.

  • Eddy||

    "To push an issue, a leader usually needs to have integrity or street cred. Abraham Lincoln had the first when he led the country out of slavery. Richard Nixon, a security hawk, had the second when he made peace with China. President Donald Trump admittedly has neither when it comes to women's issues.

    "So his administration is hardly in any moral position to revamp the rules governing sexual assault on college campuses that President Barack Obama, a paragon of propriety, put in place. Yet (etc.)..."

    This is the "to be sure" of all "to be sures."

  • creech||

    Yeah, integrity, sure. Lincoln would tell a group of Quakers he was all for abolition and then same day say he would gladly reunite the Union and let the darkies stay enslaved.

  • Don't look at me.||

    You don't seem to grasp the idea of just how important those cocktail parties are.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I love that picture and I like to imagine it's the guy's feet.

  • Dillinger||

    if they're not he's wasting time.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Why was not the Dear Colleague Letter of 2011 considered a major political scandal? At least there were actual victims, unlike paying off Stormy Daniels.

  • damikesc||

    Silly Michael --- men cannot be victims. We DESERVE it all.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    That makes as much sense as saying girls who were raped were asking for it.

  • damikesc||

    I'm not an SJW. That is their logic.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    So in other words, their logic does not make sense.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Liberals dont embrace more civil rights.

    Its why they have mostly moved on to labels like SJWs and Progressives.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    "But that's because they are putting their feminism ahead of their liberalism."

    When haven't they?

  • lafe.long||

    The reforms, I note in my column at The Week, are not perfect, but they are on the right track. And if liberals could look past the flawed leader she represents, they'd see that (actually, maybe they won't given that no amount of intersectionality can ultimately overcome identity politics that derives an agenda not from broad universal principles but tribal identity politics).

    Wow... Sounds almost like Shikha's been red pilled. lol.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    The Obama-era rules had a disparate impact on minority men

    What's why the left like them.

  • Dillinger||

    more sport in trying to line it up freestyle?

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    I doubt any liberal has examined the content of DeVos proposed rules.

    All they know is hate DeVos because, Trump.

  • damikesc||

    And why aren't people like Reason demand that the Left come up with an alternative?

    I mean, the GOP wants to remove Obamacare and it's always "Well, what are you going to replace it with?"

    Why is that not the case here?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online