In late November of 2018, the U.S. Department of Education formally published its proposed changes to Title IX. The changes pertain mostly to educational institutions, including college campuses, and the processes they go through in cases of sexual misconduct.
The DOE claims these changes will provide additional support for victims and increase protections for the accused. Many groups advocating for expanded rights for the accused have lauded the proposal while victims and their advocates have pushed back.
The formal publication of the proposed changes to Title IX came with a two-month open comment period where the public was invited to voice its opinion on the changes on an online forum. Hamilton’s administration took several measures to voice its concerns over the proposed new rule.
First, the College, along with 23 other small colleges across the United States, cosigned a letter to Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, in which the joint group laid out a number of arguments against the proposed changes, including that institutions should be able to create disciplinary proceedings that best fit the individual institution. The letter points out that the proposed mandatory live hearings would “likely increase complexity, costs, and delays, and may deter reporting,” and highlights the added emotional toll to victims. The letter concludes by asking the Department to consider the burden this new proposed rule would place on both students and the administrations of colleges.
Hamilton’s administration also signed on to comments prepared by the New York 6, a consortium of liberal arts colleges in New York. The NY6 comments argue that live cross-examinations would create an “unnecessarily stressful” environment for all parties, exacerbate socioeconomic disparities of the parties involved, and would essentially expect institutions to set up their own “internal court systems.”
This letter focused primarily on the ways in which the proposed Title IX changes would conflict with existing New York State law. The NY6 argue that their institutions already abide by “extensive” New York laws and implementing additional federal laws would be both unnecessary and complicated.
The final measure taken by Hamilton’s administration before the national comment period closed was to issue a statement specific to the College. This statement contends that, under the new proposed rule, the definition of sexual assault would be “inappropriately” limited in the types and scope of conduct that may be considered. The letter says such a limited definition is not consistent with the College’s own definition and would no longer cover situations reviewed by Hamilton’s Title IX office under its current definition.
The statement goes on to identify four other ways in which the new rule would conflict with Hamilton’s policies, contesting the proposed stipulations of investigations into each complaint regardless of severity, mandated live hearings, unrestricted access to review evidence for both parties, and prohibition of both parties to discuss allegations in an ongoing investigation.
All three letters were signed when the comment period closed on Jan. 30, and can be found on Hamilton’s website.
In addition to these official statements, Hamilton’s Title IX office held informational sessions open to those in the campus community interested in learning more about the proposed changes.
Catherine Berryman, the College’s Director of Community Standards and Title IX coordinator, has also been in conversation with the other NY6 and NESCAC schools to discuss ways in which each institution may have to change current policies in the Department of Education’s proposed changes are implemented.
Given that the comment period ended recently, the final version of the rule has not yet been decided and Hamilton has not been required to implement any changes to its Title IX policies or proceedings.
