Should University Tribunals Be Able To Expel Students Accused Of Assault Without A Civil Trial Or Criminal Conviction ?

Which applies to universities accepting government funding and following title ix ?

  • Undecided , to Title IX proceedings counting as legal processes .

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Feb 3, 2018
3,703
916
140
" Should University Tribunals Be Able To Expel Students Accused Of Assault Without A Civil Trial Or Criminal Conviction ? "

Any recently exposed to employment applications may recall questions about criminal background , even including whether one had been charged , even though the charges may have been dropped , and any recently exposed to an employment environment understands that employees are being scrutinized for safety and security .

It is well understood that to be eligible for certain government contracts , or funding , " private " institutions are required to implement governance policies compliant with proscriptions or prescription designated by government .

Suppose a student files a complaint about sexual assault with the campus security of a university , however the student claiming to have been assaulted does not wish to pursue criminal charges with the public police department .

Assuming a university maintains a policy of privately investigating any credible claim of assault , if such a university accepts federal funding , should it continue to be possible for university tribunals to make decisions about expulsion of an accused , or must some other legal recourse be required by a university due to title ix ?

* Federalist Society : Do Title IX Proceedings Count as Legal Processes, or Don’t They? *

This post was originally published at the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.
..
The Obama administration’s efforts to use Title IX to pressure universities to crack down on campus sexual assault transformed higher-education law.
..
But the core issue remains whether campus procedures that “have been compared unfavorably to those of the infamous English Star Chamber” have sufficient procedural integrity to be reliable.
..
During June, this debate manifested itself in a highly unusual way—with campus accusers claiming that their schools’ Title IX procedures had sufficient reliability to allow accusers to seek protection from the courts. This question matters because colleges have long gotten around basic rights-of-the-accused norms by arguing that campus tribunals are not the equivalent of trials. If such tribunals are formal legal processes, then accused students must be given rights. If they aren’t, then certain abuse-of-process and witness-immunity questions cannot go accusers’ way.



The following is the opening of the text of Title IX, which is followed by several exceptions and clarifications:[5]

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

— Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute (20 U.S. Code § 1681 – (men and women) Sex)
 
I guess it depends on the circumstances, but issues such as sexual assault shouldn't be handled by the university anyway. They should be referring these cases to the local police. I don't know why that's so hard.
Because universities these days are run by communists and have to control everything.
 
" When Inclined To Not Compound Involvement With Extensive Drama Of Public Disclosure "

* Institutions Of Private Discipline Handling Non Public Matters *

I guess it depends on the circumstances, but issues such as sexual assault shouldn't be handled by the university anyway. They should be referring these cases to the local police. I don't know why that's so hard.
Are district attorneys allowed to decline to prosecute sexual assault ?

Which is the percentage of incidence in female sexual assault victims inclined to expose sensitivities of situations overtly in a public court to obtain a criminal or civil prosecution ?

There is human resources and community relations departments within any organization , and whichever guidelines are proposed by government , few would prevent the termination of an employee , or working relationship , for safety or security , for such things as contributing to a hostile work environment , whether by offensive manner or by threats or acts of violence .

A terminated employee or client is able to file a claim of wrongful termination in arrears .
 
No as in hell no, fuck no and whatever else you want to preclude it with for emphasis.
Think of the Duke lacrosse team. They were vilified by American media and were all temporarily expelled, their season suspended, and the coach was forced to resign.
Even though the stripper was known for making false claims in the past, and DNA proved not one single lacrosse player was guilty.
The President of Duke canceled the entire season even AFTER the boys were proved innocent.

Fair tribunal? - yeah... NO
 
" Big Brother Tactics For Dispositioning Caustic Attitudes To Alternative Institutions "

* Free Association Penalties Remanded By Choices Of Private Individuals *

Inflicting penalties based solely upon accusation is medieval at best.
Before concepts of a greater individual as a bureaucratic state , both civil and criminal prosecution occurred through private prosecution .

Membership in a private organization , however that organization determines its membership , does not internally answer to jurisdiction of a state .

Consider a situation where a university is made aware of a hostile behavior about one of its enrollment members , what does its decision to terminate membership of an enrolled member , incur a requirement to answer to jurisdiction of a state ?

Clearly , the decision to terminate membership of an enrolled member , for exhibited behavior considered violent , does not affect a jurisdiction of a state or the due process or redress of grievances of the accused through tort in arrears .

 
Last edited:
" Disparagement Of Customer Base In Free Enterprise "

* Privacy And Public Persona Of Private Corporations Following Bureaucratic Guidelines For Funding *

No as in hell no, fuck no and whatever else you want to preclude it with for emphasis.
Think of the Duke lacrosse team. They were vilified by American media and were all temporarily expelled, their season suspended, and the coach was forced to resign.
Even though the stripper was known for making false claims in the past, and DNA proved not one single lacrosse player was guilty.
The President of Duke canceled the entire season even AFTER the boys were proved innocent.
Fair tribunal? - yeah... NO
For certain , many situations include a poster child of possible mishaps , but how prevalent are such situations , and should a few disparage a greater ability to manage effectively ?

The university , the students , the coach , anyone involved , may petition to be made whole through civil claims by tort .

From the federalist society article in the op , the challenge seems to be whether a university would be required to file a civil suit under title ix when seeking to expel a student , or staff .
 
" Big Brother Tactics For Dispositioning Caustic Attitudes To Alternative Institutions "

* Free Association Penalties Remanded By Choices Of Private Individuals *


Before concepts of a greater individual as a bureaucratic state , both civil and criminal prosecution occurred through private prosecution .

Membership in a private organization , however that organization determines its membership , does not internally answer to jurisdiction of a state .

Consider a situation where a university is made aware of a hostile behavior about one of its enrollment members , what does its decision to terminate membership of an enrolled member , incur a requirement to answer to jurisdiction of a state ?

Clearly , the decision to terminate membership of an enrolled member , for exhibited behavior considered violent , does not affect a jurisdiction of a state or the due process or redress of grievances of the accused through tort in arrears .

It is not clear to whom you are responding except that it cannot be my post, where no mention of state or government occurred.
 
" Methods Of Engagement Designed To Goad Complicity With Jurisdiction By Surrender Of Autonomy "

* Opportunities Optioned To Carry Relevance Elements Of A Conversation *

It is not clear to whom you are responding except that it cannot be my post, where no mention of state or government occurred.
It is okay to request for an elaboration , or clarification of statements .

An intent of the thread is to review possible contingencies on private collegiate institutions for adopting title ix , in exchange for federal funding , which includes a legal contingency that pleadings for civil wrights violations , as per title ix , may be heard in federal court prior to dismissing a student , or may be heard in federal court after dismissing a student .


* Delineating Orders Of Jurisdiction Hierarchy *
Inflicting penalties based solely upon accusation is medieval at best.
Are you supposing that the disposition of students , through university tribunals , consistently inflicts penalties based solely on accusations ?

Would inflicting penalties through frivolous actions be subject to tort in a civil court ?

If title ix is a " legal process " , does it require that any actions by the school to dismiss or expel a student for cause , even if by accusation , occur by the process of private civil prosecution , by a university against student in federal court , for compliance with title ix ?
 
Last edited:
" Presumptive Order Of Judicial Stay Until Outcome By Public Trial Quashed Or Sustained "

* Priority Privilege Of Private Disposition *

Where is Monk-Eye on the Spectrum?
An agreement by universities to adopt title ix s likely to mean that universities can disposition a student for cause when it is consistent with title ix , and that universities are subject to tort for any violations of civil wrights according to title ix .

This moniker remains undecided about an ability of a court to order that a university tribunal would not be able to disposition a student for cause , which the university perceives to be consistent with title ix , without first having to affirm the decision through civil court ,

* Poll Vote Cast *
 
Last edited:
" Presumptive Order Of Judicial Stay Until Outcome By Public Trial Quashed Or Sustained "

* Priority Privilege Of Private Disposition *


An agreement by universities to adopt title ix s likely to mean that universities can disposition a student for cause when it is consistent with title ix , and that universities are subject to tort for any violations of civil wrights according to title ix .

This moniker remains undecided about an ability of a court to order that a university tribunal would not be able to disposition a student for cause , which the university perceives to be consistent with title ix , without first having to affirm the decision through civil court ,

* Poll Vote Cast *
Thank you. That is much clearer.
 
No they should not be allowed to do so. The idea of sending home dangerous rapists and sexual predators back to their home communities is a disgrace. College students who are going around raping their fellow students or others in a university community should be sent to the penitentiary, not sent home where they can victimize others.
 

Forum List

Back
Top