Blog

Why College Courtrooms Use Low Standards Of Evidence

Posted by Joseph D. Lento | Oct 01, 2018 | 0 Comments

The controversy of Title IX and its applicability to sexual misconduct proceedings is rooted in institution's ability to protect survivors of assault, but not to the extent where it infringes on the due process rights of respondents. It's a balancing act that many colleges and universities have yet to master. But as previously reported, possible reform from the Department of Education could change what the enforcement of this law looks like.

One of the most contentious aspects of the new proposed guidelines is the option to choose between two standards of evidence for Title IX proceedings: “preponderance of evidence” or “clear and convincing.”

The former option, the preponderance of evidence, was imposed in the era of the Obama administration and is one of the lowest standards on the spectrum. Based on this standard, an accuser must provide evidence that proves that there is a greater than 50% chance that the accused violated school policy. The clear and convincing standard is used in courts to decide if an accusation is highly probable. This standard is more rigorous than the preponderance of evidence, but is less rigorous than “beyond a reasonable doubt” - a standard that is commonly used in criminal trials.

The Obama administration's line of reasoning for mandating the preponderance of evidence is simple. It was the only standard that was consistent with other civil rights proceedings. Colleges and universities essentially handpick the type of students they want to attend their school. Institutions have wide discretion as to how they establish and enforce the rules students must follow when they get there. Because of this fact, disciplinary proceedings result in repercussions that don't at all resemble civil or criminal penalties.

Schools may impose sanctions upon a responsible party that entails having to change their schedule, or be suspended or expelled from campus. Relatively lenient consequences compared to incarceration, probation, and other civil or criminal penalties. Since civil and criminal punishments are severe, it arguably makes sense that they warrant higher standards of evidence.

But not everyone agrees with using the preponderance of evidence in college disciplinary proceedings. One prominent critic being the Secretary of the Department of Education, Betsy DeVos, who believes the low standard undercuts due process and impedes fundamental fairness.

As of now, it's been reported that the Education Department is still deliberating about whether or not to make the change. If it goes through, it will have an overwhelming impact on the many cases that are still open or have yet to be reported.

Nationwide Title IX Advisor

The only way to make sure your voice is heard and your rights are upheld is to retain a student defense attorney. For respondents, especially, the assistance of an attorney advisor is invaluable in the Title IX process. National Title IX attorney Joseph D. Lento has the skill, experience, and expertise to help you preserve your entitled rights under Title IX and your school's policy. For a case evaluation or more information about his representation, contact him online or give him a call at 888-535-3686 today.

About the Author

Joseph D. Lento

"I pride myself on having heart and driving hard to get results!" Joseph D. Lento has more than a decade of experience passionately fighting for the futures of his clients. Mr. Lento represents students and others in disciplinary cases and other proceedings at universities and colleges across the United States while concurrently fighting in criminal courtrooms in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, and New Jersey. Mr. Lento has helped countless students, professors, and others in academia at more than a thousand universities and colleges across the United States. He does not settle for the easiest outcome, and instead prioritizes his clients' needs and well-being. Joseph D. Lento is licensed in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, and is admitted pro hac vice as needed nationwide.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Contact Us Today!

footer-2.jpg

If you, or your student, are facing any kind of disciplinary action, or other negative academic sanction, and are having feelings of uncertainty and anxiety for what the future may hold, contact our offices today, and let us help secure your academic career.

This website was created only for general information purposes. It is not intended to be construed as legal advice for any situation. Only a direct consultation with a licensed Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York attorney can provide you with formal legal counsel based on the unique details surrounding your situation. The pages on this website may contain links and contact information for third party organizations – the Lento Law Firm does not necessarily endorse these organizations nor the materials contained on their website. In Pennsylvania, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout Pennsylvania's 67 counties, including, but not limited to Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, Berks, Lancaster, Lehigh, and Northampton County. In New Jersey, attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New Jersey's 21 counties: Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Salem, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren County, In New York, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New York's 62 counties. Outside of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, unless attorney Joseph D. Lento is admitted pro hac vice if needed, his assistance may not constitute legal advice or the practice of law. The decision to hire an attorney in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, New Jersey, New York, or nationwide should not be made solely on the strength of an advertisement. We invite you to contact the Lento Law Firm directly to inquire about our specific qualifications and experience. Communicating with the Lento Law Firm by email, phone, or fax does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Lento Law Firm will serve as your official legal counsel upon a formal agreement from both parties. Any information sent to the Lento Law Firm before an attorney-client relationship is made is done on a non-confidential basis.

Menu