In addition to being consistent with Title IX, we believe that the ARP is good policy, particularly the controversial preponderance of evidence standard.
If we have the opportunity to become a role model of an equitable student judicial process, why wouldn’t we?
If you’ve followed our column over the past few months, you’ve probably noticed that we’re somewhat critical of several aspects of Stanford. We’ve tried to weigh in on the most controversial topics on campus, but as the joke goes about the liberal/conservative divide in Synergy being drawn around paper towels, conflicts on campus are on relatively few fringe questions.
Last week, on the advice on the U.S. Justice Department, President Hennessey’s office unilaterally lowered the standard of proof in Judicial Affairs cases involving sexual assault from “beyond a reasonable doubt” to “a preponderance of the evidence.” While some might be frustrated that he failed to consult the student body in making this change, it’s altogether understandable; President Hennessey is responsible for a large check from the federal government that’s contingent on complying with it’s edicts.
On April 12, President Hennessy released an executive order to lower the standard of proof from “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” to “Preponderance of the Evidence” in cases on sexual assault and relationship abuse. The decision came on the heels of Vice President Biden’s stern call to U.S. universities to better account for campus sexual violence.