TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Thinks Some College Title IX Trials Are Unfair to Accused

52 点作者 MollyR大约 7 年前

5 条评论

HarryHirsch大约 7 年前
The <i>Reason</i> piece is a commentary on an interview with Judge Bader Ginsburg in the <i>Atlantic</i>; the full piece is here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theatlantic.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;archive&#x2F;2018&#x2F;02&#x2F;-&#x2F;553409&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theatlantic.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;archive&#x2F;2018&#x2F;02&#x2F;-&#x2F;55340...</a>
评论 #16415438 未加载
duxup大约 7 年前
It&#x27;s hard to imagine there are many folks who work in the legal world wouldn&#x27;t be shocked by some of practices at colleges. Colleges shouldn&#x27;t be playing the amateur legal system game, and they&#x27;re doing a great job of proving why at seemingly every turn.<p>After a local university in my area did a review of their processes some of the recommendations were pretty shocking. Things like &quot;the accused should be allowed to present evidence&quot;, &quot;the accused and accuser should be allowed to have or provided representation&quot;, &quot;the accused should be notified of appeals&quot;. It&#x27;s hard to have a response that isn&#x27;t a WTF.gif to things like that.
jeffdavis大约 7 年前
Kangaroo courts, plain and simple. Sacrificing innocent people to get more of the guilty ones when evidence is flimsy.
评论 #16415462 未加载
misterbowfinger大约 7 年前
I wasn&#x27;t familiar with reason.com. Looked through a bit, it looks like it&#x27;s a digital publication with a libertarian angle:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;reason.org&#x2F;frequently-asked-questions&#x2F;#q1" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;reason.org&#x2F;frequently-asked-questions&#x2F;#q1</a><p>Not an issue per se, but good to know.
评论 #16415442 未加载
评论 #16415489 未加载
bitwize大约 7 年前
It&#x27;s important to distinguish between the policies of specific campus sexual-assault review boards and what was set forth in the 2011 Department of Education &quot;Dear Colleague&quot; letter.<p>There is nothing objectionable in the &quot;Dear Colleague&quot; letter, and it articulates sound policy for American colleges. While it is true that colleges must adhere to a &quot;preponderance of the evidence&quot; standard or risk falling out of Title IX compliance, a) preponderance of the evidence is the appropriate standard to use in non-criminal proceedings, including and especially civil-rights violations which are what Title IX covers; b) colleges also risk falling out of compliance of Title IX if the accused and the complainant do not have equal access to information used at the hearing, or equal time and opportunity to present their respective cases.<p>Whenever disciplinary investigation by a school for sexual assault becomes a &quot;kangaroo court&quot;, it is almost assuredly a CYA move on the part of the college staff to look like they are &quot;doing something&quot; about campus rape without following the procedures set forth by the government. But it&#x27;s not only unfair and against the law, it&#x27;s in violation of Title IX and the very letter the MGTOW crowd has been whinging about.<p>Oh, and Betsy DeVos is an idiot for overturning this policy.