The following is an excerpt from an article originally posted on The Chronicle for Higher Education.

Requiring cross-­examination in campus sexual-­misconduct proceedings is among the key features of the Department of Education’s proposed Title IX reforms currently open for public comment. The department, relying on an oft-cited 1904 legal treatise, calls cross-­examination “the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” Although this new mandate might seem at first like a good idea, a closer look shows otherwise.

The usual image of cross-examination includes trained lawyers asking precise, rigorous questions of individuals on the other side of a case and a judge ruling on well-crafted objections to improper questions. But campuses are not courtrooms, and the reality at most colleges and universities would look quite different if the proposed regulations take hold.

Traditionally, students involved in college-misconduct processes have been permitted to choose an adviser to provide them with support and information. In many instances, peer advisers, faculty members, and even parents have ably filled that role. Likewise, at most colleges, neutral faculty members or administrators are assigned responsibility for asking questions and otherwise investigating to determine whether wrongdoing occurred.

Read the full article here


Suzanne B. Goldberg

Campus Sexual Misconduct Associate Reporter

Suzanne Goldberg is the Herbert and Doris Wechsler Clinical Professor of Law and Director, Center for Gender and Sexuality Law at Columbia Law School, as well as the Executive Vice President for University Life, Columbia University. She is one of the country’s foremost experts on gender and sexuality law and a leading advocate for the LGBTQ community. In 2015, she was appointed to serve as Columbia University’s first executive vice president for university life. In this role, she works to reinforce and broaden the university’s commitment to respect, inclusion, and ethical leadership among students, faculty, and administrators. She is a frequent commentator and analyst for news media on sexuality and gender law, and on discrimination law and litigation issues.


Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *