Senate Bill 11-12-09
| Bill ID: | 11-12-09 |
| Name: | Proposal to Retain "Clear and Convincing Evidence" as the Evidentiary Standard in Sexual Harassment Cases |
| Proposed: | 09/06/2011 |
| Sponsor: | John A. Tossell, Emeritus Professor |
| Proposal: | In April 2011, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) of the Department of Education wrote a "Dear Colleague" letter to universities charging them to change the evidentiary standard for guilt in sexual harassment cases from "clear and convincing evidence" to the much weaker "preponderance of the evidence". The AAUP has strongly opposed this change in two letters to OCR, stating that this change would violate due process and weaken academic freedom for faculty and students. In effect it would substitute the weak standard used in civil cases where mostly money changes hands for the stronger standards using in criminal trials. Since penalties for sexual harassment convictions can include loss of tenure and termination of employment the higher evidentiary standard should be used. So far as I can tell, the evidentiary standard used in sexual harassment cases is never precisely stated in University documents. It is noted in the University of Maryland Policy and Procedures on Sexual Harassment (VI-1.20(A)) part B. Procedures that "The Campus is committed to protecting the rights of the alleged offender as well as the offended". It is also stated in the Human Relations Code Article III Paragraph L that "The burden of proof rests with the complainant". This seems to me to suggest a burden of proof of the "clear and convincing evidence" variety. I would like to see it stated explicitly that in sexual harassment cases the "clear and convincing" evidence standard should be used. Such changes could simply be announced and placed in the Policy and Procedures documents available online. No new personnel would need to be established. |
| Active? | No |
| Policy: | http://president.umd.edu/policies/vi120a.html |
Status
| Status: | Completed |
| Completed On: | 03/08/2012 |
History
| Status: | Complete |
| Reviewer: | Senate |
| Received: | 2012-03-01 |
| Decision Date: | 2012-03-08 |
| Decision: | The Senate reviewed the report. |
| Actions: | The report was presented to the Senate as an informational item. |
| Related Files: |
| Status: | Complete |
| Reviewer: | Senate Executive Committee (SEC) |
| Received: | 2012-02-16 |
| Decision Date: | 2012-02-22 |
| Decision: | The SEC voted to forward the EDI Committee's report to the proposer and to place the item on the March 8th Senate meeting agenda as an informational item. |
| Next Step: | Senate Review |
| Related Files: |
| Status: | Complete |
| Reviewer: | Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion (EDI) Committee |
| Received: | 2011-09-28 |
| Decision Date: | 2012-02-06 |
| Decision Due By: | 2012-03-30 |
| Decision: | To recommend that no changes regarding evidentiary standards be made to the policy at this time. |
| Actions: | The Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion (EDI) Committee will review the charge and proposal at its meeting on October 5, 2011. EDI met with the proposer, John Tossell, on November 14, 2011 to further discuss this proposal. EDI also consulted with Roger Candelaria, Campus Compliance Officer, on information related to this charge. |
| Next Step: | SEC Review |
| Related Files: |
| Status: | Complete |
| Reviewer: | Senate Executive Committee (SEC) |
| Received: | 2011-09-19 |
| Decision Date: | 2011-09-26 |
| Decision: | The SEC voted to charge the EDI Committee with reviewing the proposal. |
| Actions: | The SEC reviewed the proposal at its meeting on September 26, 2011. |
| Next Step: | Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Committee Review |
| Related Files: |