"Fraternity boys need more protection than rape victims do."
That's the mentality that went into hiring Trent Lott and others to lobby for the Safe Campus Act.
First, some background.
Sexual assault on college campuses is a huge problem. This is not news. Back in 1994, President Clinton signed the Violence Against Women Act ("VAWA"), which (in case the name wasn't a spoiler) did a whole bunch of things to combat violence against women. It funded rape investigations and prosecutions, imposed mandatory sentences on rapists and penalized prosecutors who looked the other way on certain rape cases. VAWA had bipartisan support, because in the 90s, we all agreed that violent crime was bad. It wasn't a total love fest, because the Supreme Court did cut a provision that would have allowed women to sue their attackers in civil court. Still, VAWA was a good start.
VAWA was renewed by Presidents Bush and Obama, and except for the usual partisan nonsense (how money should be allocated, how the law should affect LGBTs and immigrants) there was never much debate over the law's core.
Alongside VAWA, the Clery Act (and related regulations) helped colleges fight campus violence. In 2013, Congress passed an amendment called the Campus SaVE Act, which required colleges receiving Title IX funding (basically, every school) to dedicate real money and effort to sexual assault prevention training on campus. While things haven't been perfect, our laws at least have made sense.
Enter 2014. Scandal after scandal is reported on college campuses. From secret Facebook caches of naked pictures to full-scale group rapes, every news cycle seems to have another example of abhorrent campus behavior.
And while thinking humans are discussing ways to create safe, productive college environments, there are professional lobbyists and elected officials out there actually working against us. That's right. You heard me. There are lawmakers out there trying to make it easier on rapists and harder on rape victims.
How the hell is that even possible?
Ironically named the "Safe Campus Act" is a new bill, originally sponsored by Republican Reps. Matt Salmon of Arizona, and Pete Sessions and Kay Granger of Texas. Write those names down and file under "misogynist". This legislation would actually prohibit colleges and universities from investigating sexual assault cases or punishing sexual predators until the victim reports the crime to police. In a predictably bottom-feeding maneuver, former Minority Whip Trent Lott has offered up his D.C. connections and contracted with a consortium of fraternities to lobby for this repulsive law.
Wait, maybe there's a good reason behind this all...
Yeah, no. The colossally ridiculous argument is that this law will effectuate justice by protecting the rights of the falsely-accused. Because, of course, the real epidemic on American campuses is lack of procedural due process. Right.
I'm all for fair hearings, even for accused rapists. But this law is not about fairness. It makes no requirement that any other crime is reported to police. Schools can still investigate and discipline drug dealers, robbers, thieves and harassers. The only criminals who will be shielded are sexual offenders.
Is it possible that the proponents of Safe Campus thought it was somehow going to help create safer campuses?
Not. Bloody. Likely.
This is a terrible idea. Everyone from victims' groups to school administrators to victims themselves have said this law is asinine. The Fraternity and Sorority PAC thinks it's great, and isn't concerned with how it would adversely affect victims, so there's that.
Victims of sexual violence often hesitate to come forward, rape is difficult to prove and thousands of rapists walk free on campuses every year. The idea that we need federal legislation to protect the rights of accused rapists at the expense of victims is nothing short of ludicrous.
Trent Lott, in his op-ed piece, tried spin it as follows:
Thanks, Trent. Last I checked, the school disciplinary system is completely separate from the criminal justice system. I haven't heard of a lot of cases where the District Attorney says, "Let's not prosecute this rapist. He got expelled before earning his B.A., and that's enough punishment in my book."
Currently, girl gets raped, girl tells school. School investigates and calls in police. Girl feels empowered, criminal gets punished on and off campus. Under the Safe Campus Act, girl gets raped and knows talking to campus security will be meaningless unless she is ready to testify in court. Girl is afraid. Girl doesn't report. Rapist goes free.
Schools are not courts. Schools can't incarcerate people. That's why schools don't need to follow the rules of evidence and due process when they decide to throw students out. Fraternities aren't spending thousands on lobbyists because they're truly concerned about the impact rapists have on society at large. They're trying to protect their own asses. Nice try, though.
What about the false accusation issue?
Young men do need to take steps to protect against false accusations. Sexual assault laws should be used as a shield for victims and not as a sword against the innocent. We already have plenty of laws that impose penalties on false accusers.
The best way innocent young men can protect themselves from false accusations is to actively create safe environments. College men should be encouraging more victims to report violent crimes. They should be speaking out when fellow students post pictures of naked, unconscious girls. They should take the bold step of having actual rules within fraternity houses. They should be creating less tolerance for predatory behavior, and should be speaking out against violence -- not against campus police.
Asking Congress to pass a law that ties the hands of schools trying to protect their own students is not the answer to campus rape scandals. If fraternities want to be sure that they aren't unfairly caught up in scandals, they should work harder to prevent scandals. They should create policies for how they expect their members to act, and they should not tolerate violence under any circumstances.
No one wants to see the guilty go free. The Safe Campus Act would discourage many victims from coming forward, which will unquestionably result in lost evidence, more cover-ups, and less justice.
The saddest thing about Safe Campus is that its support stems neither from a pursuit of justice, nor even from a true mistrust of false accusers. The real support comes from those who believe that our young men cannot be trusted, ever - those who believe that creating a safe environment on campus is impossible. The logic must be "we can't protect victims from fraternity boys, so we may as well protect fraternity boys from the consequences."
What can we do?
As our 2016 candidates keep reminding us, we live in a representative democracy. Call your Senator. Call your Congressmen and Congresswomen. Call your kids' colleges. Post, Tweet, talk. And let's rally some good young men to tell Congress they don't need extra protection, because they will be part of the solution by taking an active part in stopping campus violence.
#SafeCampusAct #CampusRape