A recent challenge to Georgetown University's sexual assault adjudication confidentiality policies may lead the University to change its own Sexual Assault Board procedures, Senior Associate Dean of Students Shamin Sisson said.
According to a federal review released in July, Georgetown University was violating the rights of campus rape victims by requiring them to sign documents agreeing not to speak about the outcomes of their campus court hearings before they were given the results of the hearings.
"We have determined that Georgetown's approach is inconsistent with the requirements" of the federal Clery Act, wrote U.S. Department of Education official M. Geneva Coombs in a letter sent to Kate Dieringer, a Georgetown student. Dieringer complained about the practice after she was asked to sign a confidentiality agreement before being told of disciplinary action taken against a Georgetown student who was eventually convicted by the school of raping her.
The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act is a federal law that requires colleges and universities to disclose information about campus crime and security policies. All public and private institutions of postsecondary education participating in federal student aid programs are subject to its mandates. Violators can be fined up to $27,500 by the U.S. Department of Education or face other enforcement action.
The Clery Act, originally enacted by the Congress and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush in 1990 as the Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990, was championed by Howard and Connie Clery after their daughter Jeanne was murdered at Lehigh University in 1986. The Clerys also founded the non-profit Security On Campus, Inc. in 1987.
Amendments to the Act in 1998 renamed it in memory of Jeanne Clery. Security on Campus, Inc. assisted with the filing of Dieringer's complaint.
S. Daniel Carter, senior vice president of Security On Campus, Inc., said the University's current confidentiality policies are very similar to those contested at Georgetown.
"We believe that they are similar in that we believe that the policy at the University of Virginia is equally illegal," Carter said. "Disclosure of the outcome to both the accused and accuser must be unconditional."
Students involved in sexual assault adjudication proceedings at the University have never been required to sign formal confidentiality agreements in order to learn the outcomes of their hearings, Sisson said. Students have, however, been asked to make verbal agreements not to speak about the outcomes of their proceedings in order to protect both the accused and accusing student's privacy, she added.
"We have asked that these proceedings be handled confidentially because only one side of the story can be told by one person -- it's that person's version of the events," she said.
However, Carter said many campus confidentiality clauses ask students not to make statements about the outcomes or proceedings of campus courts even if they do not reveal personal information about the other student involved.
"Such provisions are in place to prevent there being oversight of the process rather than to protect confidentially of anyone involved," Carter said.
Like the contested policy at Georgetown, the University's policy is based on compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, which protects educational records.
Because inter-campus adjudication bodies such as the University's Sexual Assault Board do not deal directly with the courts, many colleges and Universities have considered their outcomes as part of students' educational records and therefore exempt from the disclosure required by the Clery law.
The Georgetown ruling should give University administrators reason to review their policies to bring them into compliance with the Clery law, Carter said.
"As the [federal] Department of Education agreed with, the Clery Act provision adopted in 1992 supercedes the FERPA which was adopted in 1974 and does in no way constitute a violation of FERPA," Carter said.
University administrators are aware of the Georgetown case and will be looking at the ways in which it could affect University policy, Sisson said.
"Given what has transpired at Georgetown we are reviewing our policy and will change it," Sisson said.
The University's sexual assault adjudication procedures are under review this year, she added.
Strides toward a new confidentiality policy should be made by the spring semester, but in the meantime University administrators will consult with attorneys if any sexual assaults are reported in order to make sure that they are in compliance with the Georgetown decision, Sisson said.
It is likely that students who participate in the sexual assault adjudication proceedings will no longer be asked to keep the outcomes confidential, she said.
Students may still be asked to refrain from making public statements before outcomes are reached, however, in order to facilitate a fair process, she added.
Allowing students to speak about their experiences with campus sexual assault adjudication processes allows for open dialogue about the processes' strengths and weaknesses and is the only way to achieve a fair process, Carter said.
"Confidentiality policies serve to stifle oversight which can lead to problems with process," Carter said. "Everyone needs to be accountable for someone. These campus courts are effectively accountable to no one."
Read More
U.Va. Health sees a spike in COVID-19 cases
By Emily Horn | September 4, 2023U.Va. Health ended their vaccination requirements in August, and masks were made optional in most hospital areas in early April.
U.Va. Cancer Center harnesses $12 million grant to support opportunities for undergraduates, ongoing research and new center
By Ellen Wu | January 12, 2023The grant provides an opportunity to establish the Center for Systems Analysis of Stress-Adapted Cancer Organelles, which seeks to find the cause of cancer in individual organelles.
U.Va. Health's rural neurology clinics receive a $500,000 grant to fund research and patient care
By Shrinidhi Kittur | January 12, 2023Established in the rural towns of Tazewell, Abingdon and Wise, the clinics have been providing patient care to otherwise underserved populations for decades.
