National Review Online
Thursday, May 07, 2020
Betsy DeVos, the secretary of education, is an especial
hate figure for progressives, who are absolutely howling over changes in
federal regulations covering how colleges and universities handle
sexual-assault and sexual-harassment cases.
The changes coming might seem radical — if you were
living in, say, pre-Magna Carta serfdom or under the jurisdiction of a
particularly officious agent of the Spanish Inquisition. For 21st-century
Americans, the right to question witnesses and accusers and to have an opportunity
to evaluate the evidence presented against you should be the most obvious and
unobjectionable thing in the world, but it isn’t — not on college campuses. And
so thanks are due to Betsy DeVos.
Joe Biden has, of course, promised to reverse course immediately
if elected president. We would think that Joe Biden, of all people, would
appreciate the need for the full and fair investigation of such matters, given
that his presidential aspirations are tangled up with an allegation from a
former aide that he forcibly sexually assaulted her. Biden is determined that
he will enjoy a full hearing in the matter and a chance to defend himself from
allegations that, if the former vice president is to be believed, are not true.
A sophomore at Oberlin deserves as much.
And so DeVos is pushing in the right direction. But there
is the deeper question of why campus proceedings are appropriate at all to
handle matters of sexual assault, which is a serious crime and the business of
police and prosecutors, not the business of deans of students who have no
particular competency in prosecuting felonies or misdemeanors. If a college
wants to maintain a policy of expelling students convicted of certain crimes
(or policing lower-stakes violations of campus policies), then that is entirely
reasonable. But seeing to that conviction is the business of the
criminal-justice system, not the higher-education system. Sexual assault is not
a matter of the campus honor code — it is a question of serious criminal
misconduct.
Where police departments and prosecutors are negligent or
incompetent, as they sometimes show themselves to be in these matters, then
that is an occasion for reforming the police departments and prosecutors’
offices — not for handing over law-enforcement duties to professors and college
administrators. Of course, victims of sexual assault may be uncomfortable
talking to police and may find the prospect of doing so traumatic; universities
can support these students with counseling and mental-health services, but
colleges cannot substitute themselves for the criminal-justice system.
Taking the police out of the equation invites abuse, from
Lena Dunham’s hoax
claim of having been raped by a College Republican at Oberlin to the Duke
lacrosse case to Rolling Stone’s fictitious account of a rape at the
University of Virginia. Rape hoaxes are a particularly odious instance of an
all-too-common phenomenon of our times, the Jussie Smollett–style hate-crime
hoax. The power of such claims makes them irresistible to political partisans
and others in need of handy weapons for character assassination, as in the case
of Brett Kavanaugh.
We should do all that we can to support the victims of
sexual assault. And we are not doing the victims of crimes any favors by
steering them away from treating these crimes like crimes and going to the
police with them.
No comments:
Post a Comment