U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

96–035 PDF 2016

PREVENTING AND RESPONDING TO 

SEXUAL ASSAULT ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION 

AND WORKFORCE TRAINING 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, SEPTEMBER 10, 2015 

Serial No. 114–27 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: 

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/committee.action?chamber=house&committee=education 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota, Chairman 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Duncan Hunter, California 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

Tim Walberg, Michigan 

Matt Salmon, Arizona 

Brett Guthrie, Kentucky 

Todd Rokita, Indiana 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Luke Messer, Indiana 

Bradley Byrne, Alabama 

David Brat, Virginia 

Buddy Carter, Georgia 

Michael D. Bishop, Michigan 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Carlos Curbelo, Florida 

Elise Stefanik, New York 

Rick Allen, Georgia 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Ranking Member 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio 

Jared Polis, Colorado 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 

Northern Mariana Islands 

Frederica S. Wilson, Florida 

Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon 

Mark Pocan, Wisconsin 

Mark Takano, California 

Hakeem S. Jeffries, New York 

Katherine M. Clark, Massachusetts 

Alma S. Adams, North Carolina 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Juliane Sullivan, Staff Director 

Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE TRAINING 

VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Matt Salmon, Arizona 

Brett Guthrie, Kentucky 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Luke Messer, Indiana 

Bradley Byrne, Alabama 

Carlos Curbelo, Florida 

Elise Stefanik, New York 

Rick Allen, Georgia 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Ranking Minority Member 

Hakeem S. Jeffries, New York 

Alma S. Adams, North Carolina 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Jared Polis, Colorado 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on September 10, 2015 ..................................................................... 1 

Statement of Members: 

Foxx, Hon. Virginia, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Higher Education 

and Workforce Training ............................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Hinojosa, Hon. Rube ́n, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training .................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 6 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Cohn, Mr. Joseph, Legislative and Policy Director, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, Philadelphia, PA ............................................ 36 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 39 

Maatz, Ms. Lisa M., Vice President for Government Relations, American 

Association of University Women, Washington, DC .................................. 26 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 29 

Rue, Dr. Penny, Vice President for Campus Life, Wake Forest University, 

Winston-Salem, NC ...................................................................................... 19 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 21 

Scaduto, Ms. Dana, General Counsel, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA ....... 7 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 9 

Additional Submissions: 

Mr. Hinojosa: 

U.S. Department of Education’s 2014 guidance on Title IX and sexual 

violence ................................................................................................... 132 

U.S. Department of Education’s list of Higher Education Institutions 

With Open Title IX Sexual Violation Investigations .......................... 185 

Chart: Intersection of Title IX and the Clery Act ................................... 188 

Letter dated August 12, 2015, from The National Alliance to End 

Sexual Violence ...................................................................................... 196 

Letter dated September 10, 2015, from Feminist Majority Foundation .......................................................................................................... 199 

Prepared statement of Speier, Hon. Jackie ............................................. 204 

Letter dated September 24, 2015, from The National Domestic Violence Hotline .......................................................................................... 209 

Salmon, Hon. Matt, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Arizona: 

Letter dated September 10, 2015 from, The National Coalition For 

Men Carolinas (NCFMC) ...................................................................... 212 

Byrne, Hon. Bradley, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Alabama, questions submitted for the record to: 

Dr. Rue ....................................................................................................... 217 

Ms. Scaduto ................................................................................................ 219 

Response to questions submitted: 

Dr. Rue ....................................................................................................... 222 

Ms. Scaduto ................................................................................................ 225 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(1) 

PREVENTING AND RESPONDING TO SEXUAL 

ASSAULT ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES 

Thursday, September 10, 2015 

U.S. House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 

Training, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce, 

Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in Room 

2261, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Virginia Foxx [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Foxx, Roe, Salmon, Guthrie, Heck, 

Curbelo, Stefanik, Allen, Hinojosa, Jeffries, Adams, DeSaulnier, 

Davis, Courtney, and Polis. 

Also present: Representatives Kline, Scott of Virginia, Bonamici, 

and Speier. 

Staff present: Lauren Aronson, Press Secretary; Janelle Belland, 

Coalitions and Members Services Coordinator; Tyler Hernandez, 

Press Secretary; Amy Raaf Jones, Director of Education and 

Human Resources Policy; Nancy Locke, Chief Clerk; Brian Newell, 

Communications Director; Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; 

Lauren Reddington, Deputy Press Secretary; Alex Ricci, Legislative 

Assistant; Mandy Schaumburg, Education Deputy Director and 

Senior Counsel; Emily Slack, Professional Staff Member; Alissa 

Strawcutter, Deputy Clerk; Juliane Sullivan, Staff Director; 

Tylease Alli, Minority Clerk/Intern and Fellow Coordinator; Jared 

Bass, Minority Education Policy Counsel; Tina Hone, Minority 

Education Policy Director and Associate General Counsel; Brian 

Kennedy, Minority General Counsel; Veronique Pluviose, Minority 

Civil Rights Counsel; Rayna Reid, Minority Education Policy Counsel; Michael Taylor, Minority Education Policy Fellow; and Arika 

Trim, Minority Press Secretary. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Good morning, everyone. A quorum being 

present, Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce will 

come to order. 

Welcome, everyone, to today’s committee hearing. We are in a 

different location and we are a little tighter in here today than we 

normally would be, and ask everybody’s indulgence as the renovation work goes on in the committee room. We will all be friendlier 

and kinder to each other today—and closer to each other. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

2 

I would like to thank our witnesses for joining us to discuss an 

issue that affects far too many students: campus sexual assault. 

Earlier this week, as millions of students stepped foot on a college or university campus, members of Congress returned from 

their districts to continue their work strengthening America’s higher education system. As we all know, that effort often requires difficult but necessary conversations about tough issues, which is why 

we are here today. 

Every college student should be able to learn in an environment 

that is free—safe and free from fear and intimidation. Yet, for some 

students that is not the case. 

According to one study, approximately one in five women in college has been sexually assaulted. Several universities, including 

Rutgers, Michigan, and MIT, report similar findings, and a number 

of recent high-profile cases further highlight the scope and seriousness of this important issue. 

As a former community college president, mother, grandmother, 

I know I am not alone when I say that all of us have a responsibility to protect students from sexual assault on campus. As one 

university president exclaimed, ‘‘The issue of sexual assault keeps 

me awake at night. I feel personally responsible for the safety and 

well-being of all students.’’ Another said, ‘‘I see the issue of sexual 

violence and sexual assault on colleges and universities as a matter 

of national importance.’’ 

Students, parents, educators, administrators, and policymakers 

across the country share this same sentiment and have joined a national conversation about these heinous crimes and how we can 

better protect students. 

At the college and university level, efforts to prevent and respond 

to sexual assault are underway. For instance, some colleges and 

universities now require students to participate in seminars to help 

them understand what sexual assault is and how to prevent and 

report it. At the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, for example, these seminars reinforce a safe campus culture and explain 

university policies and procedures for responding to reports of sexual violence. 

Institutions are also improving how they support victims of sexual assault, providing resources and counseling services to help 

students recover from such a terrible event, complete their education, and continue with their lives. Just as important, administrators are working to put in a place a fair resolution process that 

respects the rights of the victim and the accused. 

At the national level, the federal government has been working 

with colleges and universities to prevent and respond to sexual assault for decades. More recently, members of Congress have introduced legislative proposals intended to improve protections for college students. Additionally, the administration has established new 

policies institutions must follow. 

Colleges and universities have rightly raised concerns about the 

administration’s one-size-fits-all regulatory approach. While wellintended, the administration has further complicated a maze of 

legal requirements; added to the confusion facing students, administrators, and faculty; and made it harder for institutions to guarantee student safety. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

3 

As Dr. Rue will explain during her testimony, the patchwork of 

federal and state policies has impeded the efforts of administrators 

and educators to prevent and respond effectively to sexual assault 

on their campus. 

As Congress works to strengthen higher education it must ensure tough, responsible policies are in place to fight these crimes 

and support the victims. 

I am pleased to have a panel of witnesses to represent all sides 

of this difficult yet important discussion. Your observations and 

recommendations are vital to our efforts to help colleges and universities provide students the safe learning environment they deserve. 

With that, I now recognize the ranking member, Congressman 

Hinojosa, for his opening remarks. 

[The statement of Chairwoman Foxx follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on 

Higher Education and Workforce Training 

Earlier this week, as millions of students stepped foot on a college or university 

campus, members of Congress returned from their districts to continue their work 

strengthening America’s higher education system. As we all know, that effort often 

requires difficult but necessary conversations about tough issues, which is why we 

are here today. Every college student should be able to learn in an environment that 

is safe and free from fear and intimidation. Yet for some students, that is not the 

case. According to one study, approximately one in five women in college has been 

sexually assaulted. Several universities – including Rutgers, Michigan, and MIT – 

report similar findings, and a number of recent high-profile cases further highlight 

the scope and seriousness of this important issue. 

As a former community college president, a mother, and grandmother, I know I’m 

not alone when I say that all of us have a responsibility to protect students from 

sexual assault on campus. As one university president exclaimed, ‘‘The issue of sexual assault keeps me awake at night ... I feel personally responsible for the safety 

and well-being of all students.’’ Another said, ‘‘I see the issue of sexual violence and 

sexual assault on colleges and universities as a matter of national importance.’’ 

Students, parents, educators, administrators, and policymakers across the country 

share this same sentiment, and have joined a national conversation about these heinous crimes and how we can better protect students. 

At the college and university level, efforts to prevent and respond to sexual assault are underway. For instance, some colleges and universities now require students to participate in seminars to help them understand what sexual assault is and 

how to prevent and report it. At the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill, 

for example, these seminars reinforce a safe campus culture and explain university 

policies and procedures for responding to reports of sexual violence. 

Institutions are also improving how they support victims of sexual assault, providing resources and counseling services to help students recover from such a terrible event, complete their education, and continue on with their lives. Just as important, administrators are working to put in place a fair resolution process that 

respects the rights of the victim and the accused. 

At the national level, the federal government has been working with colleges and 

universities to prevent and respond to sexual assault for decades. More recently, 

members of Congress have introduced legislative proposals intended to improve protections for college students. Additionally, the administration has established new 

policies institutions must follow. 

Colleges and universities have rightly raised concerns about the administration’s 

one-size-fits-all regulatory approach. While well-intended, the administration has 

further complicated a maze of legal requirements, added to the confusion facing students, administrators, and faculty, and made it harder for institutions to guarantee 

student safety. As Dr. Rue will explain during her testimony, the patchwork of federal and state policies has impeded the efforts of administrators and educators to 

effectively prevent and respond to sexual assault on their campuses. 

As Congress works to strengthen higher education, it must ensure tough, responsible policies are in place to fight these crimes and support the victims. I am pleased 

we have a panel of witnesses to represent all sides of this difficult yet important 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

4 

discussion. Your observations and recommendations are vital to our effort to help 

colleges and universities provide students the safe learning environment they deserve. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. 

I join you in welcoming our distinguished panel of witnesses. 

The subject of this hearing is extremely sensitive. As ranking 

member of this subcommittee, I believe that we must raise the 

level of awareness in our communities and throughout our nation 

about the seriousness of campus sexual assault and its impact on 

our victims, both women and men, and their families. These impacts are far-reaching and include poor academic performance, 

stress, depression, and abuse of alcohol and drugs. 

In addition to supporting the victim, we must also be sensitive 

to the rights of the accused. Institutions of higher education must 

have processes that ensure fairness in handling the allegations of 

campus sexual assaults and that campus investigations are consistent with our nation’s longstanding principles of due process. 

Whatever system is put in place, we must ensure that victims 

are not afraid to come forward. Unfortunately, many victims are 

reluctant to report sexual assaults because of shame, or fear of retaliation, or worries about lack of proof, uncertainty that what happened constitutes assault, or possibly because they lack information on where or how to report the assault, and fear of being treated poorly by the criminal justice system. 

As a nation, we have made progress towards better understanding and addressing this serious challenge of campus sexual 

assault. For example, through the development of the White House 

Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assaults, the Department of Justice’s Office of Violence Against Women developed a 

multiyear initiative to provide support to programs to prevent campus sexual assault and their recent online resource center for 

changing our campus culture. 

In the year 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice also funded a 

groundbreaking study on campus sexual assault. The findings of 

that study were staggering. Let me give you some examples. 

Among- women in college, nearly 20 percent will bevictims of attempted or actual sexual assault; as well, about 6 percent of undergraduate men. Most victims were violated in their first or second 

year at college. The majority, 75 to 80 percent, knew their 

attackers—often a friend, a classmate, acquaintance, or someone 

they dated. 

The study also confirmed that the risk of campus sexual assault 

for undergraduate women increases greatly with the consumption 

of alcohol and/or drugs. It is clear, our concerted efforts are needed 

to deal with these serious issues. 

In addition to these federal efforts, I am proud to report that my 

own home state of Texas is responding to calls of action. Starting 

this year, colleges and universities are required to inform students 

of campus sexual assault policies during freshmen orientation. 

Schools are also required to review and update those policies every 

2 years. 

Students returning to class at the University of Texas campuses 

this fall will also be participating in the nation’s most comprehenCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

5 

sive study on sexual assaults ever conducted in higher education. 

The Cultivating Learning and Safe Environments case study will 

be led by researchers at U.T. Austin School of Social Work and will 

include online questionnaires for students; surveys and focus 

groups of faculty, staff, and campus law enforcement; and a 4-year 

cohort study of entering freshmen to identify the psychological and 

economic impact of sexual violence. The U.T. system is spending 

$1.75 million dollars on this study. 

So I applaud U.T.’s effort to address campus sexual assault and 

urge other colleges and universities throughout our country to join 

in the commitment to end sexual violence on their campuses. 

In closing, let us renew our efforts to support victims of campus 

sexual assault. We can’t wait for yet another high-profile incident 

to occur before we address this issue. 

I look forward to hearing what recommendations our panel of 

witnesses may have to reduce sexual assault on our college campuses, and I thank you. 

And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back. 

[The statement of Mr. Hinojosa follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Rube ́n Hinojosa, Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training 

Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. I join you in welcoming our witnesses, Ms. Lisa 

Maatz, Mrs. Dana Scaduto, Mr. Joseph Cohn, and Dr. Penny Rue. 

The subject of this hearing is extremely sensitive. as Ranking Member of this 

Subcommittee, I believe that we must raise awareness in our communities and 

throughout our nation about the seriousness of campus sexual assault and its impact on our victims both women and men and their families. These impacts are far 

reaching and include poor academic performance, stress, depression, and abuse of 

alcohol and drugs. 

In addition to supporting the victim, we must also be sensitive to the rights of 

the accused. Institutions of higher education must have processes that ensure fairness in handling allegations of campus sexual assaults, and that campus investigations are consistent with our nation’s long standing principles of due process. 

Whatever system is put in place we must ensure that victims are not afraid to 

come forward. Unfortunately, many victims are reluctant to report sexual assaults 

because of shame; fear of retaliation; worries about lack of proof; uncertainty that 

what happened constitutes assault; or because they lack of information on where or 

how to report the assault; and fear of being treated poorly by the criminal justice 

system. 

As a nation, we have made progress toward better understanding and addressing 

this serious challenge of campus sexual assault. For example through the development of the white house task force to protect students from sexual assaults, the department of justice’s office on violence against women developed a multiyear initiative to provide support to programs to prevent campus sexual assault and their recent online resource center for changing our campus culture. 

In 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice also funded a groundbreaking study on 

campus sexual assault. The findings of the study were staggering. For example: 

among women in college, nearly 20% will be victims of attempted or actual sexual 

assault, as will about 6% of undergraduate men. Most victims are violated in their 

first or second year at college. The majority -75% to 80%—knew their attackers – 

often a friend, classmate, acquaintance, or someone they dated. The study also confirmed that the risk of campus sexual assault for undergraduate women increases 

greatly with the consumption of alcohol and/or drugs. 

It is clear our concerted efforts are needed to deal with these serious issues in 

addition to these federal efforts, I am proud to calls for action. starting this year, 

colleges and universities are required to inform students of campus sexual assault 

policies during freshman orientation. Schools are also required to review and update 

those policies every two years. 

Students returning to class at the University of Texas campuses this fall will also 

be participating in the nation’s most comprehensive study on sexual assaults ever 

conducted in higher education. the cultivating learning and safe environments 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

6 

(clase) study will be led by researchers at UT Austin’s Achool of Social Work, and 

will include online questionnaires for students; surveys and focus groups of faculty, 

staff and campus law enforcement; and a 4–year cohort study of entering freshman 

to identify the psychological and economic impact of sexual violence. The UT system 

is spending $1.7 million on this study. 

I applaud UT’s effort to address campus sexual assault and urge other colleges 

and universities to join in the commitment to end sexual violence on their campuses. 

Let us renew our efforts to support victims of campus sexual assault. We cannot 

wait for yet another high– profile incident to occur before we address this issue. I 

look forward to hearing what recommendations our witnesses may have to reduce 

sexual assault on our college campuses. 

Thank You, and with that, I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Hinojosa. 

Pursuant to committee rule 7(c), all members will be permitted 

to submit written statements to be included in the permanent 

hearing record. And without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous material referenced during the hearing to be submitted for 

the official hearing record. 

It is now my pleasure to introduce our distinguished witnesses. 

Ms. Dana Scaduto is the general counsel at Dickinson College in 

Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Previously, she was in private practice in 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, where she chaired her firm’s education 

law practice and represented several Pennsylvania private colleges, 

including Dickinson. Ms. Scaduto is an active member of the National Association of College and University Attorneys and a member of the Legal Services Review Panel of the National Association 

of Independent Colleges and Universities. 

Dr. Penny Rue is vice president for campus life at Wake Forest 

University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Dr. Rue is responsible for the well-being and safety of Wake Forest University students and their education outside the classroom and is nationally 

known for her creative leadership in strengthening campus communities. 

Ms. Lisa Maatz is vice president for government relations for the 

American Association of University Women, AAUW, here in Washington, D.C. Ms. Maatz previously spent 16 months serving concurrently as the interim director of the AAUW Legal Defense Fund. 

She has done similar work for the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund and the Older Women’s League. 

Mr. Joseph Cohn is legislative and policy director at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, FIRE, in Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania. He is a former staff attorney for the United States 

Court of Appeals for the third circuit and law clerk in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Immediately prior to joining FIRE, 

Mr. Cohn served as the interim legal director for ACLU affiliates 

in Nevada and Utah. 

I now ask our witnesses to stand and raise your right hand. 

[Witnesses sworn.] 

Let the record reflect the witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

You may take your seat. 

Before I recognize you to provide your testimony, let me briefly 

explain our lighting system. You have 5 minutes to present your 

testimony. When you begin, the light in front of you will turn 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

7 

green; when 1 minute is left, the light will turn yellow; when your 

time is expired, the light will turn red. At that point, I will ask 

that you wrap up your remarks as best as you are able. 

Members will each have 5 minutes to ask questions. 

Now I want to recognize Ms. Scaduto for her comments. 

Thank you. 

TESTIMONY OF MS. DANA SCADUTO, GENERAL COUNSEL, 

DICKINSON COLLEGE, CARLISLE, PA 

Ms. SCADUTO. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx, and good morning. 

And good morning, Ranking Member Hinojosa and Chairman 

Kline. 

I thank you for the opportunity to be here today. As a higher 

education senior administrator with a long history of involvement 

in the issue of sexual misconduct on our nation’s campuses, I am 

here today because we share the committee’s commitment to educating our nation’s students in safe and supportive environments. 

American colleges and universities are happy to work in partnership with the government and others on finding solutions that will 

help bring about cultural change and put an end to this most serious problem. As we move forward, I want to take a few minutes 

to share with you some of the challenges higher education is facing 

in our efforts and to propose some ways in which our government 

and this subcommittee can further help us achieve greater success 

in preventing and responding to sexual violence. 

As I make my comments this morning, I will use the term ‘‘victim’’ out of expediency and because it is referenced in the Campus 

SAVE Act, but without any personal preference as to terminology. 

First, please recognize that the reports of sexual violence we receive on our campuses are not straightforward or easy to resolve. 

The sexual violence claims we see most frequently do not involve 

force or attacks by strangers, but happen between individuals who 

are acquainted, where one or both are intoxicated, and where the 

primary issue is whether consent to a sexual act was given. We are 

left to resolve word-on-word conflicts between two people whose 

memories may be impaired and where there are no witnesses. 

Add to this the fact that reports may not be made for days, 

weeks, or months following an event, and I can hope you see the 

complexity of resolving such issues in a manner that the parties believe to be fair. 

And while speaking of fairness, colleges and universities are committed to providing fair treatment to all of our students, including 

not only victims of sexual violence but also to those accused of sexual violence. The changes over the last 4 years have resulted in 

complexities and challenges in maintaining the necessary balance. 

For example, on a small campus, removing an accused student 

from a class in order to keep the student away from an alleged victim before any determination of responsibility can be made may result in the accused student being forced out of a class where there 

are no other sections or being forced out of a class shortly before 

graduation. We are also often trying to navigate the complexities 

of VAWA, Clery, and Title IX laws, regulations, and guidance, as 

well as state laws simultaneously and without the confidence that 

we can do so to the satisfaction of all. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

8 

Employees’ duties to report under various standards differ. What 

and how we are supposed to advise victims of their options for moving forward when they report a sexual assault are just two examples of those complexities. 

Additionally, the current laws and guidance do not appear to recognize that college disciplinary proceedings are not equipped to replace law enforcement or judicial functions. The members of our 

campus communities who are expected to meet and discharge the 

new standards established for resolving sexual violence claims are 

faculty, staff, and, historically, students—not judges nor lawyers. 

To support colleges’ and universities’ efforts to improve culture 

around this serious issue and to help us in our efforts to hold violators accountable through processes that are fair, equitable, and impartial, I recommend the following four points for your consideration: First, pause in considering legislation that adds additional 

requirements to those already complex network of federal and state 

laws, regulations, and OCR guidance until there has been an opportunity to evaluate whether the efforts to date are working. As 

a reminder, the VAWA regulations only went into effect July 1st 

of this year. 

Second, consider creating a safe harbor for higher education that 

does not relieve us from accountability for failures to comply, but 

which provides us with certain presumptions of good faith when reviewing our conduct. For example, when we are applying fact-based 

tests established by various laws, such as in deciding whether to 

investigate or not over a victim’s objection, if we miss the mark but 

are found to have acted in good faith in our efforts, provide us with 

protection from penalties or administrative action. 

Third, if new requirements are considered at some point in the 

future, OCR should follow notice and comment requirements of the 

Administrative Procedures Act. The Title IX guidance put into 

place since 1991—since 2001 was done without notice or comment 

from parties outside the agency, depriving colleges and universities, victims and survivors, and other interested parties of the opportunity to provide input that may have been helpful in improving 

clarity and alignment with existing laws and regulations. 

I will leave my fourth point for your reading. 

Thank you for listening and considering my perspective as a 

higher education administrator. 

[The testimony of Ms. Scaduto follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

9 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 1 here 96035.001
10 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 2 here 96035.002
11 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 3 here 96035.003
12 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 4 here 96035.004
13 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 5 here 96035.005
14 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 6 here 96035.006
15 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 7 here 96035.007
16 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 8 here 96035.008
17 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 9 here 96035.009
18 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 10 here 96035.010
19 

Chairwoman FOXX. Dr. Rue, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. PENNY RUE, VICE PRESIDENT FOR CAMPUS LIFE, WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY, WINSTON–SALEM, NC 

Ms. RUE. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Hinojosa, and honorable committee members, for the opportunity to testify about this critically important issue. 

The higher education community takes the problem of campus 

sexual assault very seriously, and we are working diligently to prevent sexual assault and to manage systems fair to all students. 

These are not new issues for us. It has been a priority for decades 

because of our genuine care for the health, safety, and well-being 

of our students. 

Currently, we must address sexual violence compliance responsibilities under a swirl of regulations. This one-size-fits-all can create resource challenges that impede our effort to prevent and respond to sexual assault. Added to these challenges now are state 

legislatures that are enacting statutes, creating a patchwork of conflicting regulations. 

Prevention and education efforts are critical to reducing incidents 

of sexual violence. Many campuses employ online modules, allow 

new students to participate in prevention programming at orientation and belong—and beyond, online training programs to education faculty and staff to whom students might report about 

where to turn. 

According to the CDC, bystander intervention training and social 

norms training are promising practices but have not yet been validated through rigorous design, so more grant support is needed to 

conduct evaluation research in this growing field. 

At Wake Forest we use PREPARE peer educators to deliver highly interactive, situational programs to put incoming students’ attitudes to the test and really get them to think. A highly engaging 

peer theater program reinforces those messages and is followed by 

an online curriculum that uses scenarios highly relevant to students. This program, Haven, will also give us benchmark attitudes 

that we can use to assess the effectiveness of our programs over 

time. 

After students have time to navigate the social scene, they will 

participate in a program in their residence halls on bystander 

intervention training using the Step-Up model. 

Campus climate surveys are another growing practice. These are 

used to assess students’ perception of and experience with sexual 

violence, and these surveys are designed to provide an institutionspecific picture that in turn enables leaders to coordinate with the 

campus community to strengthen prevention efforts. 

One standardized survey imposed on all institutions would likely 

not accommodate the wide array of campus environments that 

range from 4-year residential, like my own, to community colleges 

and even primarily online universities. Each institution should 

have the autonomy to develop the best survey, given benchmarks 

to hit. 

Although prevention strategies are in place, sexual violence will 

still occur on our campuses. Student affairs administrators are 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

20 

committed to being fair and balanced to all of our students engaged 

in the conduct process. 

Critical to this process is the widely established practice of confidentiality for the victim and the accused, one of the primary reasons that a student will choose an on-campus practice over reporting to the police. 

One of our most important points in trauma-informed work is to 

allow the survivor the right to choose the path to follow in the 

wake of an incident. Some may want to report to the campus, some 

may want to report to the police, or both. Some may only want support. 

The institution really needs to respect that choice. To take the 

decision out of the victim’s hand by mandating that a report of sexual violence to campus automatically is turned over to the police 

will create a chilling effect on the willingness of victims to come 

forward, exactly the opposite of what we want to happen. 

The confidentiality of our conduct processes guaranteed under 

FERPA creates uncertainty about their fairness—we know that— 

most recently towards the respondent. But it is important to reiterate the campus processes are carefully structured to be fair and 

equitable to all parties. 

In the recent Washington Post Kaiser Family Foundation poll, 84 

percent of current and recent college students said they are very 

or somewhat confident in the school administration’s ability to address complaints. 

We are not a court of law. Ours is an educational process intended to arrive at a fair and equitable outcome for all parties. At 

the core of this distinction is our standard of scrutiny, preponderance of the evidence. 

I think I speak for most colleges and universities in saying that 

we do not need more regulation; we need more consultation. Guidance from the Department of Education coming without notice 

often does not help us navigate these waters. 

I strongly believe it is important to provide opportunities for public comment and discussion where the full complexity of the issues 

can be explored from those who know them firsthand. 

In closing, I must express deep concern about the narrative from 

the media that colleges and universities care more about their institution’s reputation than the rights and experiences of our students. Nothing could be further from the truth. 

Instead, those of us who handle incidents of sexual violence are 

professionals who share an overwhelming commitment to strike the 

delicate balance in today’s legislative environment to preserve the 

educational rights of students, to manage fair and equitable conduct systems, and above all, to prevent sexual violence. 

Thank you, Chairwoman. 

[The testimony of Ms. Rue follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

21 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 11 here 96035.011
22 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 12 here 96035.012
23 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 13 here 96035.013
24 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 14 here 96035.014
25 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 15 here 96035.015
26 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much, Dr. Rue. 

Ms. Maatz, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF MS. LISA M. MAATZ, M.A., VICE PRESIDENT 

FOR GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION 

OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Ms. MAATZ. Good morning. On behalf of the more than 170,000 

members—is that on? There we go. 

Good morning. 

On behalf of the more than 170,000 members, over 1,000 

branches, and almost 900 colleges and university partners of the 

American Association of University Women, I thank you for inviting us to testify today. My remarks are informed by my 12 years 

with AAUW as well as my tenure as the executive director of Turning Point, a domestic violence program recognized for excellence by 

the Ohio Supreme Court; and also at Wittenberg University, where 

I was a hall director and ran a women’s center that responded to 

incidents of sexual assault. I can personally attest to the fact that 

this is not a new problem. 

When campus environments are hostile because of sexual harassment and violence, students can’t learn. It is that simple and that 

devastating. 

Schools have an important and necessary role to play in addressing this epidemic. Why? Because student rights to an education 

free of sex discrimination are on the line. 

AAUW has long identified the need to end sexual harassment 

and violence on campuses. Our own research revealed that nearly 

two-thirds of college students experience sexual harassment. 

Just this year, a national poll found one in five women said they 

had been sexually assaulted in college. This issue impacts both 

men and women and students from all walks of life at all types of 

schools. 

Title IX and the Clery Act provide the very tools schools need to 

improve campus climates for everyone. 

Passed in 1972, Title IX is a gender-neutral law that prohibits 

sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. The law 

requires schools to take steps to eliminate sexual harassment and 

violence, prevent their recurrence, and address their impacts on individual students and the entire campus. This includes evaluating 

current practices, publishing anti-discrimination policies, and implementing grievance procedures providing for a prompt and equitable resolution of complaints. 

Schools must also provide accommodations to students, such as 

adjusting housing arrangements and class schedules and providing 

academic support—actions that schools are uniquely situated to 

provide. 

All schools should have a Title IX coordinator to oversee these 

activities as well as monitor patterns and address systemic problems. It is important to note that these requirements are not new, 

but date back to the law’s first regulations back in 1975. Since 

then, over the course of Republican and Democratic administrations, the Department of Education has continued to provide technical assistance and guidance that promotes compliance with the 

law. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

27 

Schools also follow a consumer protection law known as the Clery 

Act. It requires colleges and universities that participate in federal 

financial aid programs to disclose crime statistics and security information. 

Originally passed in 1990, Congress updated the Clery Act in 

2013 as part of a bipartisan reauthorization of the Violence Against 

Women Act. These updates require schools to report additional 

crime statistics on domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking, 

and provide ongoing sexual assault prevention and bystander intervention training campus-wide. This public report of a school’s safety efforts is valuable to students and parents and provides insight 

to schools working to improve campus safety. 

Title IX and the Clery Act are longstanding complementary laws 

that work together to ensure that students and schools have a clear 

course of action when sexual violence occurs. Appropriately, schools 

are not in the business of imposing criminal punishments. Those 

decisions are best left to authorities in charge of criminal investigation and prosecution if a survivor chooses to pursue that course. 

The school’s civil rights proceedings and any criminal investigation represent parallel yet equally necessary paths. Laws and legal 

precedence spell out clear requirements for schools to be prompt, 

fair, and impartial in all disciplinary proceedings, and Title IX 

echoes these due process requirements. 

Similarly, the Clery Act requires that school processes be prompt, 

fair, and impartial, and that both parties receive timely notice regarding the outcomes of proceedings. 

There are next steps that Congress can take to help assist 

schools and students in their efforts to end sexual harassment and 

violence. We know that the time immediately following an incident 

is especially critical for survivors. 

They need access to a safe space, medical and counseling—medical care and counseling, and information about their rights and 

where they can seek additional support. Schools should also ensure 

an advisor is available to connect survivors to all of these resources. 

The AAUW-supported Survivor Outreach and Support Campus 

Act, or the SOS Campus Act, would ensure schools take these critical steps. 

In addition, climate surveys can help schools better to understand the dynamics behind reported and unreported incidents of 

sexual violence. Schools need information in order to effectively 

combat this epidemic. When done well, climate surveys provide 

transparency that is crucial for student safety and a useful tool to 

help schools fine-tune their response. 

The AAUW-supported HALT Campus Sexual Violence Act would 

also require surveys at all schools. 

Finally, we urge Congress to provide additional resources for the 

Department of Education to support Title IX coordinators and 

other stakeholders on relevant laws and best practices. There are 

schools that are working diligently to respond to incidents of sexual 

violence, and technical assistance can help them make real change. 

Further, with more attention to sexual violence we have also 

seen an uptick in complaints, and an unprecedented number of 

schools are under investigation for Title IX compliance. The Office 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

28 

for Civil Rights needs additional funding to provide ongoing technical assistance for schools, as well as to hold bad actors accountable. 

We all believe, I think, that a single incident of sexual violence 

is one too many. When it interferes with students’ education it 

adds insult to injury. 

But we have the tools to make real change, and AAUW looks forward to working with you as you reauthorize the Higher Education 

Act and consider this important topic. 

Thank you. 

[The testimony of Ms. Maatz follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

29 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 16 here 96035.016
30 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 17 here 96035.017
31 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 18 here 96035.018
32 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 19 here 96035.019
33 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 20 here 96035.020
34 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 21 here 96035.021
35 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 22 here 96035.022
36 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you. 

Mr. Cohn, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. JOSEPH COHN, LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY 

DIRECTOR, FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS IN EDUCATION, PHILADELPHIA, PA 

Mr. COHN. Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Hinojosa, honorable members of the subcommittee, and members of the committee 

at large, thank you for the introduction. 

I am the legislative and policy director at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or FIRE. We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending student and faculty civil 

liberties on America’s college campuses. I thank you for the opportunity to discuss this critical issue. 

One of the core constitutional rights that FIRE defends is due 

process. Universities are both morally and legally obligated to respond to known instances of sexual assault in a manner reasonably 

calculated to prevent its recurrence. And for more than 50 years, 

courts repeatedly have held that the Constitution requires public 

institutions to provide meaningful due process protections to accused students. 

FIRE believes that these twin obligations need not be in tension. 

Access to higher education is critical. The stakes are extremely 

high for everybody in campus disciplinary proceedings and it is essential that no student’s education is curtailed unjustly. 

While efforts to address campus sexual assault have focused on 

eliminating bias against complainants, far too little attention has 

been placed on preventing bias against the accused. And even more 

insufficient attention has been placed on addressing what I call the 

competency gap—the difference between what college administrators are equipped to do and what the Department of Education’s 

Office for Civil Rights is demanding of them. 

Campuses are ill-suited to adjudicate allegations of sexual assault. While colleges and universities have a role to play in tackling the issue, we must make sure that we are assigning them responsibilities they are capable of performing well. 

Having defended campus due process for 15 years, FIRE is convinced that colleges are simply unequipped to serve as investigators and fact-finders in these challenging issues. 

Rape is a crime. It should be treated as such. Using amateur systems is insulting to victims and disastrous to fundamental fairness. 

Unsurprisingly, injustice for both victims and accused is commonplace. 

Sound public policy requires adjudicating these cases in courts 

after professional investigations. Only courts have the power to 

take violent predators off the streets. After all, a student has been 

expelled but not jailed is free to commit rape again. 

Complicating matters further, in the April 4, 2011 dear colleague 

letter, which OCR did not subject to public notice and comment as 

required under the Administrative Procedure Act, the agency mandated that institutions adjudicate sexual assault cases using the 

low preponderance of the evidence standard. OCR, while well-intentioned, has done more harm than good in this arena. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

37 

Since issuing the 2011 DCL, OCR has conducted over 130 Title 

IX investigations, several of which have resulted in settlement 

agreements. To the best of FIRE’s knowledge, only one such investigation is looking into whether the disciplinary process is biased 

against the accused. The resulting perception of top-down federal 

bias against the accused is inescapable. 

I would like to briefly address three bills currently pending before Congress: the Campus Accountability and Safety Act, CASA; 

the Safe Campus Act; and the Fair Campus Act. There are aspects 

of each that FIRE supports and there are provisions in each that 

give FIRE pause. 

On the positive side, all three bills aim to increase the involvement of law enforcement. If our goal is to implement a serious response to a serious problem, involving professionals in the criminal 

justice system is necessary. 

FIRE has multiple concerns about CASA, chief among them the 

fact that the bill provides no meaningful due process protections for 

the accused. None. 

Conversely, the Safe Campus Act and Fair Campus Act both include important procedural safeguards that will benefit accused 

students and complainants alike. What is more, both the Safe 

Campus Act and the Fair Campus Act would repeal OCR’s preponderance of the evidence mandate, provide the complainant and respondent crucial rights to active assistance of counsel, and require 

institutions to turn over inculpatory and exculpatory evidence to 

both sides. 

To encourage more complainants to report allegations to the 

proper authorities, the Safe Campus Act prohibits institutions from 

taking action on complaints unless they choose to report the allegation to law enforcement. FIRE agrees that punitive measures 

should be waived if a complainant does not report the accusation 

to law enforcement for investigation. However, we strongly urge 

Congress to amend the language so that non-punitive measures 

and accommodations may still be made available regardless of the 

student’s decision to report. 

While colleges have proven incapable of competently determining 

the truth or falsity of felony accusations, they are well-equipped to 

secure counseling for alleged victims, provide academic and housing accommodations, secure necessary medical attention, and provide general guidance for students as they navigate the criminal 

justice system. Institutions should perform these functions regardless of the complainant’s decision to report the incident. The bill 

should be amended to encourage them to do so. 

I provide a more detailed analysis of the bills in my written testimony to the committee. 

To sum up, there is no simple solution to the problem of sexual 

assault on campus, but lowering the bar of finding guilt and eliminating criminal due process protections—by doing that, we are creating a system that is impossible for colleges to administer fairly. 

Congress can help reverse this trend by taking all student interests 

into account. To accomplish that, Congress should include the best 

aspects of each pending bill in a comprehensive, balanced measure. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to address you, and I look 

forward to answering your questions. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

38 

[The testimony of Mr. Cohn follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

39 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 23 here 96035.023
40 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 24 here 96035.024
41 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 25 here 96035.025
42 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 26 here 96035.026
43 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 27 here 96035.027
44 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 28 here 96035.028
45 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 29 here 96035.029
46 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 30 here 96035.030
47 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 31 here 96035.031
48 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 32 here 96035.032
49 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 33 here 96035.033
50 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 34 here 96035.034
51 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 35 here 96035.035
52 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 36 here 96035.036
53 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 37 here 96035.037
54 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 38 here 96035.038
55 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 39 here 96035.039
56 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 40 here 96035.040
57 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 41 here 96035.041
58 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 42 here 96035.042
59 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 43 here 96035.043
60 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 44 here 96035.044
61 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 45 here 96035.045
62 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 46 here 96035.046
63 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 47 here 96035.047
64 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 48 here 96035.048
65 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 49 here 96035.049
66 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 50 here 96035.050
67 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 51 here 96035.051
68 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 52 here 96035.052
69 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 53 here 96035.053
70 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 54 here 96035.054
71 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 55 here 96035.055
72 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 56 here 96035.056
73 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 57 here 96035.057
74 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 58 here 96035.058
75 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 59 here 96035.059
76 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 60 here 96035.060
77 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 61 here 96035.061
78 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 62 here 96035.062
79 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 63 here 96035.063
80 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 64 here 96035.064
81 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 65 here 96035.065
82 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 66 here 96035.066
83 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 67 here 96035.067
84 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 68 here 96035.068
85 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 69 here 96035.069
86 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 70 here 96035.070
87 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 71 here 96035.071
88 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 72 here 96035.072
89 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 73 here 96035.073
90 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 74 here 96035.074
91 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 75 here 96035.075
92 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 76 here 96035.076
93 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 77 here 96035.077
94 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 78 here 96035.078
95 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 79 here 96035.079
96 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 80 here 96035.080
97 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 81 here 96035.081
98 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 82 here 96035.082
99 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 83 here 96035.083
100 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 84 here 96035.084
101 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

I would now like to recognize the chairman of the committee, 

Chairman Kline, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. KLINE. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks for holding the 

hearing. 

Thanks to all the witnesses for being here. Real experts and excellent testimony. 

I picked up a theme, if I can use that term, when I was listening 

to both Ms. Scaduto and Dr. Rue, about complexity. Somebody, I 

think it was Dr. Rue, used the words ‘‘swirl of regulations’’ and a 

‘‘patchwork of regulations.’’ And Ms. Scaduto, in her four recommendations, the one that is written and not—wasn’t oral has— 

says ‘‘harmonize standards, obligations, expectations under Title 

IX, VAWA, and Clery.’’ 

It does seem to me that it is confusing because you have different 

statutes with different requirements, and I have great confidence 

that everybody in this room—sitting up here, sitting there, or sitting in the gallery, so to speak—wants to find a way to eliminate 

sexual assaults on campus, and should it occur, to make sure that 

we are holding perpetrators accountable and that we are providing 

support and protection for victims. But it does seem to be complex. 

So I will just go to you, Ms. Scaduto, in part because I lived in 

the beautiful town of Carlisle for a while. It is a beautiful part of 

the country and of the state, and my son graduated from Carlisle 

High School. And so I have got this tie. I have just got to go to Carlisle. And it is Carlisle, not—anyway, it is a long story. 

Are you concerned that the emphasis that is being placed, the 

focus that is being placed on complying with these different federal 

laws, regulations, and guidance is detracting from your ability to 

do what is in the best interest of your students? 

Ms. SCADUTO. I apologize. 

Yes, we are. I think it is a concern shared not only on Dickinson’s campus in Carlisle, but on campuses around the country. 

If we were able to harmonize—and we understand that the promulgation of legislation and regulations is done with the best of intentions in protecting our students, and it is a goal we support. But 

when we are spending our time trying to harmonize our compliance 

with the various statutes, it takes away from where I think we as 

educators excel, and that is in educating. And that is on the side 

of prevention and training that Dr. Rue spoke so eloquently about. 

When we have different reporting requirements, for example, 

under Clery and under the OCR guidance, who—we have the same 

group of employees who are interacting with the same students but 

we are getting different standards for who must report and what 

they must report when they learn of an incident of sexual misconduct. And when that type of analysis detracts from making— 

getting the report made and responding to a student in need, it is 

problematic. 

There are ways to improve harmonization, such as the notice and 

comment period that could be used by OCR when it enacts new 

guidance, because even there are distinct differences between that 

and the VAWA regulations or the Clery regulations, for example. 

So yes, the disharmony does present complications and takes us 

off the real important work we need to do around this issue. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

102 

Mr. KLINE. Thank you very much. 

I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Scott. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Madam Chairman and Ranking Member 

Hinojosa, for calling this hearing on preventing and responding to 

sexual assault on college campuses. 

This issue of campus safety is foremost in the minds of American 

families as they send their children away to college. Congress in 

2009 declared September the National Campus Safety Awareness 

Month to help bring awareness to incidents of campus rape, mass 

shootings, and other forms of violence at educational institutions. 

Twenty-five years ago, Congress passed the Clery Act to require 

institutions of higher learning to report campus crime statistics 

and to publish campus safety and security policies. 

We know the issue of campus sexual assault is complex. Nevertheless, Title IX and the Clery Act require that once the school 

knows or reasonably should know of possible sexual violence it 

must take immediate and appropriate action to investigate or otherwise determine what occurred. 

Unfortunately, campus sexual assault is usually addressed only 

after there is an alleged incident. We have to have meaningful procedures to hold accountable those who commit sexual assaults, but 

we also must do more to try to prevent them from occurring in the 

first place. 

One strategy is to educate young people about healthy and safe 

relationships before entering college. The Teach Safe Relationships 

Act of 2015, introduced by Senator Tim Kaine of my home state of 

Virginia, would require that health education in public secondary 

schools include learning not just biology but also safe relationship 

behavior aimed at preventing sexual assault, domestic violence, 

and dating violence. Currently, federal law does not require health 

and sex education classes to include information regarding these 

relationships, which can prevent sexual assault. 

There is also a study published in the June 2015 New England 

Journal of Medicine that found that college women who participated in an intensive program showing students how to recognize 

and resist sexual aggression reduced their chance of being raped by 

nearly 50 percent and attempted rape by 62 percent. 

And we know that funding is also an issue, and funding is needed to implement educational programs and robust enforcement of 

all civil rights laws on campus. But the Department of Education’s 

funding has decreased or been flat-lined over the years and the 

agency staffing level is the lowest it has been in 34 years despite 

having a record of nearly 10,000 civil rights complaints. 

We can also do more to train campus public safety personnel, 

and support evidence-based research to strengthen college safety 

and security, and have a clearinghouse for dissemination of relevant campus public safety information. As an example, the National Center for Campus Public Safety in January 2015 conducted 

its first pilot program, offered in a course in Richmond, Virginia, 

to develop a trauma-informed sexual assault investigation and adjudication training for campus officials, including Title IX coordinators, advocates, legal counsel, and others. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

103 

Let me ask just a question to all of the witnesses. Some have alluded to some of the things we can do. Can the witnesses talk 

about—I know we are going to talk about what to do after the fact, 

but what kind of strategies can we do before the fact to actually 

reduce the incidence of campus sexual assault? 

Ms. MAATZ. That is an excellent question, Mr. Scott. Thank you 

so much for asking it. 

You know, working on relationships and students’ understanding 

of safe relationships is key, and doing that before they get to college is also important. AAUW’s research shows that sexual harassment and bullying is prevalent in K–12 schools starting really, 

quite frankly, with preschool. So having conversations about safe 

relationships, having good curriculum about how to talk about 

those issues, and also encouraging students to look at themselves 

as someone who can help, you know, to look at the bystander intervention kinds of models have been really successful. 

The CDC studies have shown that when you really do relationship education and an emphasis on safe and healthy relationships 

you do start to erode campus sexual assault. 

So you do need to start young. It needs to be consistent. It needs 

to be ongoing. And it is something that we need to get behind. 

Mr. SCOTT. Are you familiar with Senator Kaine’s bill? 

Ms. MAATZ. I am familiar with Senator Kaine’s bill. 

Mr. SCOTT. Can you make a comment about it? 

Ms. MAATZ. It is a bill that AAUW supports. I think it is smart 

to look at this kind of curriculum across the country. 

And right now, since we know we have this epidemic of campus 

sexual assault, starting young is great. Doing it in high school is 

fine, but I also would submit you probably need to start in elementary school. 

Ms. RUE. Let me just add briefly that the research is inconclusive 

because rarely do we have the opportunity to do random assignment of subject to group, which is where you can get really rigorous testing. So more support for research in this area would really be useful. We have what we know and what CDC calls ‘‘promising practices,’’ but we don’t actually have proven effectiveness. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much, Mr. Scott. 

Dr. Rue, you mentioned the importance of prevention and education efforts on the campus in reducing incidents of sexual assault. Do you have written evaluations that you can provide us on 

the results of those efforts? And could you give us just a thumbnail 

of the greatest—what have had the greatest impact on the campus 

safety climate, from what you have experienced? 

Ms. RUE. Yes, ma’am. Thank you for the question. 

The two most promising practices are bystander intervention 

training and social norms training. 

In bystander intervention training, people learn the steps it 

takes to disrupt or interrupt what looks like it is going to be problematic behavior. The truth is peers are often able to do this, but 

they need the courage to essentially change the code, if you will, 

of what is agreed upon as appropriate social behavior. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

104 

And this has been effective. Again, we haven’t had studies that 

have shown random assignment of subject to group so we call it a 

promising practice. 

The other practice is the social norms practice, and what social 

norms does is look at the gap between what people think and what 

people think other people think. And it really contributes to things 

such as rape myth. 

And so when you can ask, through research, ‘‘Does a woman 

drinking too much suggest that she wants to have sex?’’ you can 

actually measure that and you will find that people think other 

people think that but they don’t think that themselves. And so you 

can go back to your campus with that gap and combat those norms 

that are actually creating a hostile environment. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Cohn, in your testimony you make the important point that 

rape is a crime and should be treated as such. How could using 

what you call amateur systems on campus lead to injustice for both 

victims and accused students? 

Mr. COHN. Thank you for the question, Chairwoman Foxx. 

The primary way that—the way the status quo works harms 

both the accused students and the complainants is that we get unreliable findings because the people adjudicating cases don’t have 

the right tools to do it. The same people who would be fine on juries are doing—you have deans of physics departments, English 

professors, and sophomores trying to figure out if a rape occurred. 

And they are doing without forensic evidence, they are doing it 

without the subpoena power, without the ability to put witnesses 

under oath. They are doing it without rules of evidence to make 

sure that relevant information is included and irrelevant is excluded. The idea that they are going to get it right consistently 

with all of those limitations is a fantasy. 

So the primary thing that we can do is make sure that we ask 

people to play a role that they are competent to fulfill, one that 

takes advantage of the skills and what they bring to the table, and 

work together. And that is what I mean when I say that amateurism affects injustices. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Scaduto, you mentioned that you were a negotiator in the 

rule-making process for implementation for VAWA. Could you tell 

us a little bit more about that experience and how you believe the 

opportunity for stakeholders to contribute to the development of 

the regulations resulted in clearer and more transparent expectations for schools, especially in contrast to sub-regulatory guidance? 

Ms. SCADUTO. Happy to do so, Chairwoman Foxx. 

Through the negotiated rule-making there was a group of I believe 14—28 with our alternates, who were very much a part of the 

process—and we represented divergent points of views, every view, 

however, being equally committed to dealing with the issue of sexual violence. 

We had higher education administrators, like Dr. Rue, at the 

table; we had counsel, like me; we had security officers from higher 

ed; we had survivors and victims of rape, male and female both 

represented; we had advocacy groups at the table. And we did very 

hard work. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

105 

We came together over a 3-month period and we looked at proposed language proffered by the Department of Education, and we 

had the opportunity to talk about whether we should drill down in 

a particular area and impose a single standard on a particular 

issue and talk about, as Dr. Rue mentioned earlier, the fact that 

we need language which is fluid because colleges and universities 

are so different across this country: large, small, public, private, online, commuter—all those different issues. 

And it was very difficult work, but I am confident that the product we ended up with at the end of that process was a better reflection of the wider community in rules and regulations that work on 

college campuses than without it. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Hinojosa, I recognize you for 5 minutes. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you. 

My first question is to Ms. Lisa Maatz. 

You state in your statement that you read to us that current law 

requires schools to respond to campus sexual assault because a student’s civil rights are on the line. You also said that a school’s civil 

rights investigation and any law enforcement criminal investigation represent parallel and equally necessary paths. 

Can you please explain the parallel tracks of Title IX enforcement interact as compared with criminal investigations? And why 

is it so important for the victim to be able to decide whether he 

or she wants to pursue a criminal investigation as opposed to campus disciplinary process? 

Ms. MAATZ. Well, I think—thank you very much for the question. 

I think there is great confusion between what a criminal process 

looks like and what the civil rights process on a college campus is 

supposed to look like. 

College campuses are not supposed to be nor would we expect 

them to be enforcing criminal law. What they are doing is looking 

at civil rights: Has Title IX been violated? Has a woman in this 

case been—has her education been impacted and therefore she 

can’t, obviously, take advantage of her civil right to a sex discrimination-free education? 

So it is really in that sense—they are parallel tracks, but they 

are very different. Schools can’t send people to jail. You know, 

schools really look at enforcing student code of conduct. 

And, you know, before when we were talking about the notion of 

kind of amateur courts, I do take exception to that in many respects on behalf of schools, because they have been dealing with - 

and enforcing their student code of conduct for decades, in some 

issues for hundreds of years. So the reality is, they know how to 

do that. 

Where there is confusion, I think, is that when it comes to campus sexual assault, schools are supposed to be dealing with the 

civil rights impact not just on that individual student but how it 

impacts the campus as a whole, and that is different than the 

criminal proceedings that we have talked about. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you. 

Ms. Dana Scaduto, you said that colleges and universities are 

very concerned that despite their best efforts to follow applicable 

laws and guidance, achieving full compliance is not possible. And 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

106 

you also said proposing—creating safe harbors where colleges are 

not held liable under Title IX if they can show good-faith efforts to 

meet the requirements of conflicting provisions. 

Can you help me understand how creating such a safe haven 

would reduce and help prevent instances of campus sexual assault? 

Ms. SCADUTO. Certainly, Mr. Hinojosa. It is my privilege to do 

so. 

Let’s take the example—there are a couple of examples I can give 

you. If you take the OCR guidance, in it we are supposed to advise 

a victim of her right to report. Clery uses the language that we 

have to advise the victim of her right not to report. 

Is there an intended difference between those? And when you put 

those—you take that and you put it up against a state law, where, 

if you take Clery and you have to advise an individual of her right 

not to report but there is a state law that mandates reporting of 

felonies by the institution, have we created a conflict between—in 

executing on a plan that everyone wants the same outcome but we 

have this swirl of differences and we are not quite sure how to comply with all of them? 

And in our best efforts to do so, if we err by reporting under the 

state law when we have Clery telling us we have to report—advise 

a woman of her right—or a victim of her right not to report, provide us with protection and support that if, in our best efforts to 

comply, we miss the mark, that we won’t be held accountable for 

penalties or agency action. That is just one example. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you. 

Mr. Cohn, time is running out and as I heard your presentation, 

brought back memories of what is approximately 20 years of service on this committee. Congresswoman Patsy Mink, from Hawaii, 

led a group of members of Congress to focus on Title IX and there 

was a mindset throughout the country, especially from some certain states, that wanted—that Title IX removed or weakened so 

that it wouldn’t be a problem for them, their mindset that women 

were not supposed to have the same opportunities in sports. 

Now that we are dealing with this, you talk about allowing 

schools to set a higher burden of proof in these proceedings could 

make it more difficult to punish offenders. How does that contribute to making campuses safer? 

Mr. COHN. Thank you, Congressman Hinojosa, for the question. 

I think reliability in outcomes makes campuses safer. And when 

you reduce the amount of certainty that fact-finders need to hold 

without providing them the tools to reach the fact-finding in the 

first place, you are not really making campuses safer. 

At the end of the day, don’t forget, someone who has been expelled from a campus is not removed from society. They are still 

free to walk the streets. The campus isn’t actually safer either, 

even with the expulsion. 

The truth of the matter is that schools need to not be indifferent 

to claims, need to make sure that they can provide the kind of services necessary to make sure that complainants can get an education the next day. And that isn’t tied necessary to being a factfinder. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Well, I want to go on record that I disagree with 

you because the list of universities throughout the country with 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

107 

violations that are under investigation right now has doubled, tripled, and quadrupled. So I think that we really in the Congress 

need to address this, and be very, very strong— 

Chairwoman FOXX. The ranking member’s time has expired. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Dr. Roe, you are recognized. 

Mr. ROE. Thank you. 

And thank you, for the panel. This is an incredibly complicated, 

difficult situation, and I think probably I am the only one sitting 

on the dais, except perhaps Dr. Heck, who has examined women 

for sexual assault and has testified in court. It is my lifelong job 

as an obstetrician/gynecologist. It is an incredibly difficult, complicated issue you all are dealing with. 

And, Ms. Scaduto, you brought out a couple of points that hit me. 

Requirements we have from the state—if I examine a woman in 

the emergency room, I break state law if I don’t report that if this 

is a student, and they are in conflict. And I think it puts a great 

pressure, I mean, on you to know if you are doing the right thing. 

And I know that—and I am going to ask Mr. Cohn in a minute 

about this—we certainly want to protect the rights of each one, but 

I can tell you, I have dealt with patients over decades who have 

dealt with the consequences of sexual assault, and how you deal 

with it and—I mean, it changes—it is life-changing, and I mean 

forever life-changing. So how you deal with this is incredibly important, and I think the start you all made is that early on is education is absolutely the key to prevention. 

And I know, Dr. Rue, you mentioned a couple of things that really intrigued me about how you prevent that. And the results in— 

I mean, the incidence is lowered greatly. 

I don’t know whether the incidence is greater now or just the reporting is greater. I have a feeling it is just the reporting is greater. I think the crime has been there all along, and I think it just 

has been grossly underreported. 

So a couple things that I would like to know is—and I will start, 

Mr. Cohn, with you, is that you are absolutely right. To gather this 

information—I have done it meticulously before—is very difficult to 

do to protect the rights of everybody involved. 

And I know, Ms. Maatz, you mentioned we are dealing with a 

civil rights issue and a criminal issue. 

When does a school—when do you determine to turn this over to 

the police as a criminal—because it is a criminal act? 

Mr. COHN. Well, I think that is really one of the key questions 

in this debate is what is the appropriate role of law enforcement 

here? And I am glad you zoned in on it. 

At the end of the day, mandatory reporting doesn’t require a 

complainant to cooperate with an investigation. It does, however, 

require that the law enforcement is aware of it so they can at least 

reach out and offer the services they provide. 

One thing that we know—and it is a fact—is that you have only 

72 hours to get a rape kit done; you have only 48 hours to get blood 

collected that can show whether someone was drugged against 

their will or perhaps if they were so intoxicated they couldn’t possibly have consented. Once that timeframe is elapsed, it is—the 

window is gone to have that physical evidence help a claim. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

108 

FIRE primarily believes that everyone will be helped by getting 

the right professionals plugged in as quickly as possible. That is 

the way to build trust with the—with law enforcement is to make 

sure that they get the information as fast as possible when they 

can take the best and strongest actions on behalf of victims. 

It will also help the falsely accused to have information recorded 

quickly, too. It will help everyone. 

Mr. ROE. Of course, we have seen over time where with new 

DNA evidence and new evidentiary things we have had that— 

where people have been falsely accused, and obviously you want 

due process for everybody. 

Dr. Rue, to you, at Wake Forest University, what resources do 

you have for a student, either male or female, after this has occurred? Because I can tell you, as a physician it is absolutely critical. 

Ms. RUE. Thank you for your question, Representative Roe. 

I agree with you that it is a life-changing event. I have sat with 

many, many students in that process, both men and women, quite 

honestly, and it is devastating. 

We do have 24/7 on-call confidential advisors that are available 

to go wherever the student is, if the student is in the emergency 

room or if the student has gone to student health. We have 24/7 

student health and we have 24/7 student EMTs on campus, and so 

we have got a nice safety net right there. 

The most critical link is our confidential advisor. This is the person that reaches out and establishes trust. 

If the first questions someone is asked by their friends are about 

their own behavior they are likely to completely shut down. And so 

if we can get that person as fast as possible to our confidential advisor, who is trauma-informed in her counseling techniques and 

who can create that bond, and then accompany her or him throughout whatever processes, whether it be sitting through a police investigation, whether it be going to the housing department to make 

room changes or to the academic advisor. And that bond is the 

most important bond, and it is the most important role on campuses today. 

Mr. ROE. My time is expired, but one other thing that I want 

to—you all to think about is how can we streamline this so that 

you are not checking boxes but taking care of students. That is 

where the resources need to be. 

And I see it all the time where you—all this confab of things you 

have to do takes away from the real—which is taking care of the 

student and the patient. 

I yield back. 

Ms. RUE. I appreciate your commitment. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Dr. Roe. 

Dr. Adams, I would like to recognize you for 5 minutes. 

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you very much, Chairman Foxx, Ranking 

Member Hinojosa, for holding this important meeting. 

My thanks, also, to the witnesses for your testimony, and special 

shout-out to Dr. Rue, from Wake Forest, which is partially in my 

district. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

109 

Campus sexual assault is a very serious issue. It affects entirely 

too many of our students. And to be clear, even one student is too 

many. 

And so while I believe prevention through education is the best 

way to combat this growing problem, and I appreciate your speaking to that, we must still deal with the incidents that occur. Unfortunately, that is nearly impossible to do with all the differing ways 

in which institutions of higher education and law enforcement 

agencies handle sexual assault, and it is becoming more complicated with efforts to weaken Title IX. 

Although North Carolina has—does not have a significant number of incidents currently open, the case open at the University of 

North Carolina Chapel Hill is particularly disturbing, and I am disappointed that there is a case that is open in my city of Greensboro, at the University of—at Guilford College. 

I spent 40 years as a faculty member on the campus, Bennett 

College, a small women’s college, primarily African-American 

women, in Greensboro, and I had ongoing concerns then and I still 

do. And there are many things that I could talk about surrounding 

sexual assault, but I want to hone in just for a moment on the effects of women of color. 

According to the Centers for Disease Control, approximately 34 

percent of multi-racial women, 27 percent of Alaskan Native American Indian women, and 22 percent of black women, and 14.6 percent of Hispanic women are survivors of sexual violence. 

Ms. Scaduto and Dr. Rue, both Dickinson College and Wake Forest University are liberal arts institutions with pretty good resources, I think. Can each of you speak to your campus initiatives 

that address the need for cultural-specific prevention education for 

your minority students who might be dealing with the weight of 

other issues, like racial discrimination and economic disparities? 

Ms. RUE. Yes. Thank you, Representative Adams. I appreciate 

your question. 

We do take our responsibilities to all students very seriously and 

we know one size doesn’t fit all. With our African-American students, we have a peer mentoring program that creates a very tightknit bond with well-resourced upper-class students. 

And we have an increasing number of first-generation students— 

students whose parents didn’t attend college. And we have the 

First in the Forest program that really helps those students navigate, as well. 

We do try to utilize the best research to understand differential 

impact and also to get within the peer culture, because that is 

where these things occur. So the use of peer educators is our most 

important tool. 

Ms. SCADUTO. All I can say is the programs at Dickinson are 

similar. We have specialized training for African-American men in 

healthy choices and healthy habits, called MANdatory. We do many 

of the same things that Dr. Rue is doing. 

There is no question but that we can do more in cultural-specific 

impact, but right now we are putting in place—the issue is so prevalent that right now the issue is getting all of our students trained. 

It is using things like Green Dot and healthy relationships and sexuality training on our campuses for all students. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

110 

And I do imagine that as time passes we will become more proficient at looking at specific communities and how they are impacted. 

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you both. 

Ms. Maatz, within the same vein, do you have any recommendations for the best way to ensure historically black colleges and universities who have less resources, less staff, are able to provide 

comprehensive prevention and response? 

Ms. MAATZ. Well, number one, I would always encourage colleges 

and universities to not reinvent the wheel. There are local community services often—rape crisis hotlines, domestic violence shelters—that can help with prevention programs and potentially being 

these confidential advisors, which is a great best practice. 

The other thing I would say, though, specific to women of color 

is that we need to be really sensitive especially about mandatory 

reporting. We know that there are issues in terms of gender bias 

in policing and racial bias in policing, and for women of color, to 

mandate that they report to law enforcement is a great way to ensure that they don’t report to anybody, that they don’t get any help, 

that they don’t get any support. 

So we need to be culturally competent about that and sensitive, 

and I think that it is one of the reasons, quite frankly AAUW has 

sent a letter to the Department of Justice asking them to create 

new guidance in gender bias in policing to deal with some of the 

different things that women of color are facing. 

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you very much. I am out of time. 

Madam Chair, thanks very much. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Dr. Adams. 

Mr. Guthrie, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you all for being here. I appreciate it. It is 

important for us to move forward on this as we work on higher ed 

reform. 

I am in this situation. I had a daughter just graduate from college, but I have a son in college and before I came here was planning our college tour for my senior in high school, my little girl, 

and so when we leave—drop them off those days that crush us all; 

we leave them on campus and drive away. 

We want to make sure that we are doing everything we can here 

and you are doing everything you can to make sure they are in a 

safe place. And so this information is going to be good for us. 

And you look at, like, harmonizing requirements. I have 

learned—I was in state senate and now here—that when there is 

a requirement added or things done it is because something happened. And so we are reacting to something that happened and trying to prevent it in moving forward, and sometimes you get different bills that happen at different times and so you get different 

requirements. 

And it should be an opportunity for us all to sit down during the 

higher ed reform and say, ‘‘What is this report trying to accomplish 

and what is it trying to prevent, and how can we harmonize them 

and do them together?’’ So that is important to do. 

And, Ms. Scaduto, you talked in your written testimony, I believe, about some of the requirements that are established by the 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

111 

administration that don’t necessarily—or it is difficult to work 

around—with nontraditional campuses, nontraditional students. 

Would you care to elaborate on that and talk about how that is 

difficult too? We need a system to take care of that, but we want 

to see how the particular requirements make it difficult to comply. 

Ms. SCADUTO. Higher education would greatly appreciate frameworks rather than one—it goes to what Dr. Rue said earlier, onesize-fits-all. Let’s take, for example, the differences in how—in 

training or education of different constituencies on various campuses. 

Let’s just take, for example, if it were determined by good research that having students in a chair to receive training on sexual—on violence prevention is the best method, but you are a commuter campus, you are a community college, or your students don’t 

live there, you don’t have the opportunities to reach them outside 

the classroom, as you do on a residential campus. If you are an online school—and there was an online school represented in negotiated rule-making, and her perspective kept popping up, and I 

have to admit, I was like, ‘‘Oh, I hadn’t thought about that.’’ 

We need standards for reaching them with—rather than a— 

other than bright-line test. Even the question of what is a student. 

If you are an—if a student is taking one class as an adult learner 

who is taking one class, is that part of the cohort that raises the 

risk of sexual violence on your campus, or is it the 18-to 22-yearolds who live in residence? 

These are all complexities about the differences in who we are 

as institutions and how we most effectively reach those who need 

the information. If we are going to engage in cultural change and 

cultural shift, we have to have the flexibility on the various campuses across this country to reach those different audiences in different ways. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. And, Dr. Rue, I was going to ask you to elaborate 

more on your prevention, because that is where we are—want 

this—we would love to—we want to get to zero. We know we have 

to have systems because we are not at zero, but elaborate on your 

preventions that you were—you mentioned earlier, and then the 

ones that you think are most effective to students. 

Ms. RUE. Right. I am going to turn to some work done by the 

Centers for Disease Control on this, and they have nine principles 

of effective sexual misconduct prevention programs. 

The first is that it is comprehensive—it is multiple methods, not 

a one-shot deal, with varied teaching strategies. We know that people learn differently. Some learn through active engagement, others 

learn more theoretically, others more visually. 

Sufficient dosage; opportunity over time to deal with these 

issues; theory-driven, they have a foundation in theory; that they 

foster positive relationships—they are not focused on what not to 

do, but instead, what to do; that their time to developmentally appropriately—if you are just getting ready to graduate versus if you 

are just arriving, those developmental needs are different; that 

they are socially, culturally relevant, as Representative Adams has 

suggested, that we understand the different backgrounds that students bring to us; and that there is an outcome evaluation as well 

as well-trained staff. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

112 

So those are—that is what the CDC had—has. We strive for all 

of those. 

I will say that without getting into the curriculum it is difficult 

to deliver over long periods of time. We are usually working within 

a voluntary workshop format for students in our prevention programs. So I would say curricular innovations in this area would be 

very welcome. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Thanks. 

And I will just conclude with the day that you drop them off and 

you drive off campus, you are—like I said, you are crushed because 

you are—they are leaving home; but you leave them, I mean, you 

are also excited for them, and you want them to have the experience of a lifetime, and you want it to be safe and secure. So thank 

you so much for that. 

And I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Guthrie. 

Mrs. Davis, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And thank you all for being here today. I appreciate that. 

You know, we—before I—we dealt with a lot of campus issues 

around sexual violence—and I understand that we have been— 

campuses have been dealing with them for many years, but in 

terms of the visibility and the issue, it followed, to a certain extent, 

looking at sexual assault in the military. And we introduced a 

number of bills to try and get at this issue. Not so easy, and I have 

a few colleagues here from the Armed Services Committee that 

know and understand that. 

One of the things that we have been talking about here, which 

was really critical, was the support for victims, men and women, 

to have access to—you mentioned a trauma-informed, but a highly 

professional individual who really can help victims navigate the 

system and provide the kind of options available to them that they 

have, whether it is, you know, reporting or non-reporting and what 

that means, actually, for them. 

So I was just wondering, in terms of what you have seen in the 

Campus—the Safe Campus Act or other acts, are there some that 

you think actually would make it difficult for a student who chooses not to report to have those services—to receive those services? 

Are there bills that actually do tie the opportunity for victims to 

be informed by someone who really is highly trained in this area? 

And quite frankly, I am not sure that we are there yet, in terms 

of the ‘‘highly trained,’’ but at least we know where we have to go 

with it. 

Anybody want to—do you see that? Are we— 

Mr. COHN. If I can respond real quickly, Congresswoman. The 

Safe Campus Act has its mandatory reporting provision that would 

limit a campus’ response if a student doesn’t choose to report, and 

FIRE has urged Congress to amend that provision to leave all of 

the non-punitive measures still on the tables—the ones that you 

identified that shouldn’t hinge on that student’s decision. 

But we do think it is generally a good idea to have campuses 

make sure that police are investigating. So we think it is a good 

idea to limit the punitive responses the school can make. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

113 

Ms. RUE. I am going to respectfully disagree— 

Mrs. DAVIS. But, Dr. Rue, yes— 

Ms. RUE. Yes. 

Mrs. DAVIS.—Rue? 

Ms. RUE. We know that, again, that ability to navigate to that 

confidential victim support person is the most critical thing. And 

if universities are mandated to report criminally, we know it is 

going to have a chilling effect on people even getting to the very 

first resource to help. 

The truth is, people do—most students do not want to go through 

a law enforcement interview. Our experience teaches us that cops 

look for violence, for signs of struggle for weapons; they don’t understand the nuance of campus sexual assault; they tend to minimize—if you have read the book ‘‘Missoula’’ it provides a beautiful 

picture of what happens when individuals report in that setting: 

the kinds of questions they are asked, the kind of doubt that is cast 

upon them. And again, it has a chilling effect and it causes many 

to shut down, so I can’t support it. 

Mrs. DAVIS. And, Ms. Maatz, I—and addressing, as well, the harmonizing issue that we—that we mentioned earlier in terms of how 

universities, how institutions deal with this. 

Ms. MAATZ. Well, I think the mandatory reporting absolutely has 

a chilling effect. I think if you are looking for a way to not have 

students report not only just to the school, but also to law enforcement, make it mandatory. 

Part of what we are trying to do with Title IX and the Clery Act 

is create a environment on campus that supports reporting. If it is 

going to be supportive to students, it needs to actually be helpful 

to them. And that kind of reporting not only helps that individual 

student but sets the tone on campus, in terms of creating a safe— 

Mrs. DAVIS. I think what is important about that, as well, and 

the SOS Act that I have authored along with Senator Boxer basically has, I think, actually brought about a number of special advocates on campuses in 30—in the University of California system 

and others, and I think you have mentioned many schools have 

them. 

Ms. MAATZ. Thank you for that. 

Mrs. DAVIS. I think the real key is the level of training that they 

have. 

But more than that, I think what we have seen in the military 

system, as well, is the fact that people generally become more 

knowledgeable about this process, which has been a very well-kept 

secret in the past and is—I think has contributed to the fact that 

it is a fearful system, and that is what we are trying to get away 

from. 

Ms. RUE. And thanks to your work on the military, our ROTC 

programs are among our best partners now. They are part of our 

sexual misconduct working group, helping in lockstep with their 

training resources, and it is a great partnership. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much, Mrs. Davis. 

Dr. Heck, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. HECK. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

114 

I thank you all for being here and discussing this critically important topic. 

Like my colleague, the gentlelady from California, I too was 

struck by what I thought was a lot of similarities between what 

you are experiencing on campuses and what we are experiencing 

within the military, which in and of itself is experiencing an epidemic of military sexual assault. 

And, both Dr. Rue and Ms. Scaduto, in your comments you 

talked about things that are very similar: not straightforward or 

easy to resolve; do not involve force or attacks by strangers but between individuals who are acquainted; questions about effective 

consent; word-on-word conflicts may not be reported for days, 

weeks, months; and where the survivor has the right to choose a 

path within the wake of an incident, some reporting on campus or 

some to law enforcement, similar to the military restricted and unrestricted reports, where in a restricted report it is not referred to 

law enforcement but allows the victim to partake of the supportive 

services necessary to help them heal. 

Question I have is, one, amongst anybody, has there been any review of what perhaps might be best practices developed within the 

military, realizing that we are not fully there yet either, but any 

best practices that might have been implemented in the military’s 

response to this epidemic of sexual assault that may have application into what is being done on campuses? 

Ms. RUE. I would have to say I need to learn more about what 

they have done, and I am eager to do so. Thank you for that referral. 

Ms. MAATZ. I think, Dr. Heck, one of the things that I would say 

is that we have seen an increase in the reporting in the military, 

and part of the reason for that is because the conversation is being 

had, because there is now a top-down as well as a bottom-up kind 

of conversation being had; and there is training going on, and that 

makes all the difference in the world. The prevention is key, and 

I think those are all good lessons that we can use for campus sexual assault. 

Mr. HECK. Thank you. 

Mr. COHN. I don’t know enough about the military practice to 

weigh in on there. What I can say is that one interesting parallel 

is that last year we heard a lot of chatter about how the military 

tribunals should not be adjudicating these matters because of the 

potential for bias there and that instead it should be removed to 

civil courts—essentially the same argument I have been making to 

you today, which is that campuses maybe shouldn’t be adjudicating 

the facts because of the potential for bias and conflicts of interest 

instead, and that we should be relying on professionals and courts. 

Mr. HECK. Thank you. 

A question for my own edification: So if a victim on a campus 

chooses not to report to law enforcement but comes to the campus 

authorities to receive the supportive services, does that automatically then result in that case going forward for a disciplinary hearing on a college campus? 

Ms. SCADUTO. No, it does not. It is a very insightful question. 

The best guidance we get on dealing effectively with survivors of 

sexual assault tells us that they need the control to decide how to 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

115 

go—if they want to go forward, when they want to go forward, and 

how they want to go forward. Although the guidance is inconsistent, we get guidance both from OCR and under the VAWA regs 

about—that mandate that we give them their options and tell 

them. 

And it is funny, as I have listened to the conversation from Congresswoman Davis and others about the use of report, it is banging 

around in my head because we use report very specifically on campuses, and a report means someone coming forward and telling 

someone. That is a report, and that is it at its essence. 

And if they do that then we wrap our arms around them as a 

community and make sure that they get the resources they want, 

they know their options, and if they want confidential reporting, we 

can direct them in that. 

But if they come to us and they tell us, that report does not move 

forward under most circumstances—whether it is internally 

through our conduct processes, or externally through law enforcement, or both—without their consent and participation. There are 

exceptions, as you can expect. I mean, you are lawmakers; you 

know there are exceptions. 

If we have an ongoing threat to our community we might have 

to move forward without the consent of the person who brought the 

report forward, and that also is an example of why safe harbors are 

important. If we are being guided by the wishes of the victim but 

we have an ongoing threat on our campus and we make that decision to move forward, being protected from action by administrative agencies would be helpful. 

Mr. HECK. Great. So as a father of three, one who—a daughter 

who is a graduate of college, a daughter who is a junior, and a son 

who just started his freshman year, I thank you all for what you 

are doing to try—trying to make our campuses a safer place. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Dr. Heck. 

Mr. DeSaulnier, you are next. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I do want to 

say, consistent with some of my colleagues, first of all, thank you 

for having the hearing. I think the hearing helps to draw attention 

to what is, I feel, is of real urgency, and I think everyone else does. 

I hear a great commonality, in terms of our desire to take effective 

action, and we are struggling what that is. 

And also, as a parent who has dropped two kids off at college, 

the rite of passage that all of us have shared and the conveyance 

of that trust that we put in the institutions that we leave them at, 

and the expectation that these wonderful institutions will not just 

education them well but provide a culture where they feel safe and 

that they aren’t put in the situation of either being a victim or a 

bystander. 

So my analogy—and I appreciate the last two comments about 

the analogy to the military—a lot of this conversation reminds me 

of the early 1990s when I was in local government and the Clinton 

administration was bringing up domestic violence. And a lot of the 

conversations we have had remind me very specifically of the challenges. And even though everybody wanted to stop it, we have got 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

116 

to be careful of our approaches because we are all subject to subjective opinions about the relationships between men and women. 

So, to Ms. Maatz, or maybe Dr. Rue or anyone else, CDC, when 

they look at the history of, for instance, domestic violence—and no 

analogy is perfect; I understand they are—but we know a lot now 

from the 20 years since 1994, when the Federal Government took 

a leadership role and passed the Violence Against Women Act that 

was just recently reauthorized. So not dissimilar, certainly. 

And I remember talking to mandated reporters then, particularly 

educators in high school, who struggled with many of the same 

issues that you do, although because they were in the community 

I think they didn’t have some of the—maybe the cultural or professional insular—not insular; that is a poor choice of words. Maybe 

you understand what I am getting at—the uniqueness of academia 

at a college campus. 

Ms. MAATZ. Right. Congressman, I share your sense of a flashback in many respects. When I was the executive director of Turning Point, which is a domestic violence shelter and program in 

Ohio, it was during the O.J. Simpson trial; it was during the first 

efforts to pass the Violence Against Women Act. And so it felt like 

there was kind of a national teach-in on domestic violence and people were talking about it. 

And I see that bright spotlight today on campus sexual assault. 

I think many of the same things are happening. It is being very 

much driven by survivors and advocates who feel the time has 

come. And I think that also is very similar. 

I think we can take some lessons from that. We have a lot more 

data. After 20 years of the Violence Against Women Act, we have 

a lot more data about how violence occurs; we have police—law enforcement that are a lot more—have a lot more data and a lot more 

experience in dealing with it, prosecutors as well. 

But I also would continue to stress that when we are talking 

about campus sexual assault we want to be mindful of the fact that 

we are dealing with that as a civil rights issue and that we need 

to be really concerned about the access to an education that does 

not contain sex discrimination. We know too often that survivors 

will have problems. 

Oftentimes they will drop out. That obviously is an interference 

with their education. Some of them, because of some of the posttraumatic stress and other issues that they have had, their grades 

go down, and then they lose their scholarships, and then they are 

the ones who aren’t on campus. 

So it is something that we need to be mindful of. There is the 

criminal element that we need to talk about and need to harmonize, but at the same time, they are separate and distinct and 

equally necessary paths. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. And I appreciate that. 

I will let Dr. Rue respond, as well, because you were relating to 

my initial comments. 

But we know from domestic violence and we know, as your comments said, of the causality and the multigenerational aspects of 

this. So the sooner we get the regulations right, the better. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

117 

And I would opine, based on that history and others, that the 

Federal Government does have an appropriate role in it. Making 

sure that role is effective I think is what we are all talking about. 

Doctor? 

Ms. RUE. I appreciate the earlier representative who brought up 

the issue of earlier education. We sadly know through our incoming 

student surveys that students have already been in abusive relationships. They have already had relationships that were controlling, that left them with self-doubt and unable to stand up for 

themselves. 

So we do support—and we do understand these as 

multigenerational issues. If students don’t have excellent role models to look to, where do we find that? 

So we would love Department of Education to engage the K–12 

system in these conversations, as well. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you. 

Mr. Salmon, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. SALMON. Thank you. 

My first question is, is there any data out there that we can access that would deal with a victim that has initially chosen not to 

report to law enforcement who later regrets that and decides they 

want to report it to law enforcement and they want the individual 

prosecuted? Is there any data on that? 

Mr. COHN. Congressman Salmon, interestingly enough, there is 

an absence of that data. We don’t know, when a prosecutor chooses 

not to bring a case forward, why they made that decision all the 

time. Sometimes it could be because of outdated modes of thinking 

about women and stereotypes, but other times it could be because 

of spoliation of evidence. 

We simply don’t track that, and that is a major concern. And 

that is one of the reasons why we think it is so important to get 

the right medical and— 

Mr. SALMON. Well, and I guess that is one of my big concerns. 

I was talking to Dr. Roe, who has dealt with a lot of victims and 

had to examine them and deal with them and court proceedings, 

and a lot of times later on an individual who decides they don’t 

want that person prosecuted decides they do. And I have these concerns about going to the university or the college, and maybe the 

counselor or advisor leaning on them, maybe talking them out of 

prosecuting because of concern for the alleged perpetrator’s career 

or education. 

Whatever the case may be, I worry about the fact that an individual who decides initially not to prosecute or not to report to the 

law enforcement, all the forensics is lost and then several months 

later or several years later they decide, still within the statute of 

limitations, ‘‘I want that individual prosecuted so they are not 

going to do that to anybody else,’’ and then the forensics is not 

there because it was never reported to law enforcement and the 

people that ended up dealing with it didn’t have the capability to 

even put a case together in the first place. 

Mr. COHN. One other critical aspect of mandatory reporting is 

that there is no way to build up more trust with police than to 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

118 

work with them. You know, we can’t fix a problem—if there is a 

problem in the criminal justice system it needs to be tackled directly with the criminal justice system. 

If we are concerned about the chilling effect of having a police 

officer pick up the phone and say to them, ‘‘I heard about your complaint. Is there something I can do to help?’’ we will never get beyond the barrier of improving that system. They can only do that 

through working together with trust. 

And hopefully you will get more prosecutions and more convictions, you know, if law enforcement is brought in faster. 

Mr. SALMON. Well, it seems to me that the dialogue here today 

has been much more a focus on helping the victim cope and deal, 

and that is all incredibly important, and to deal with the aftermath 

and go forward. But I don’t hear a lot of dialogue about justice. 

Mr. COHN. But that is— 

Mr. SALMON. I don’t hear a lot of dialogue about keeping evil perpetrators off the streets so they don’t do it to another girl. I mean, 

I have two girls that have graduated from college too, and I would 

be livid if some perpetrator who has sexually abused numerous 

girls and they all decided not to report, and that kid is still out 

there, you know, seeking to harm other girls and my girl ends up 

getting harmed, I am going to be pretty ticked off that guy is allowed to keep perpetrating these crimes. 

Mr. COHN. Right. And I think one other thing needs to be said 

here about justice. 

People keep saying that this isn’t a criminal justice issue and 

that the panel isn’t going to send someone to jail. That is only partially true. 

The dean isn’t going to sentence someone to 20 years in jail. That 

is true. But what is important for you to all hear as well is that 

the transcripts of the hearings are admissible in criminal trials and 

have been admitted across the country. 

A prosecutor can independently decide if they want to click 

‘‘print’’ and use everything that was said against an accused student. There are tremendous Fifth Amendment considerations here, 

so justice really requires meaningful due process, which I am so 

glad is part of the conversation— 

Mr. SALMON. Can I just interject, because that was one of my 

other questions. Talk a lot about due process, and that is a fundamental right here in the United States for anybody that is accused 

of crimes. Can you tell me the difference between ‘‘preponderance 

of evidence’’ and ‘‘beyond a reasonable doubt’’? 

Mr. COHN. Sure. The criminal justice system used— 

Mr. SALMON. Because that is very fundamental. 

Mr. COHN.—‘‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’’ which is almost near— 

you know, near certainty. ‘‘Preponderance of the evidence’’ is 50.01 

percent certainty that something was more likely to have happened 

than not. The difference between being 50.01 percent certain and 

49.9 is so minimal it really amounts to just which hunch you believe more. 

That is not a problem in civil courts, where there are all of the 

procedural protections that go into play—discovery, lawyers, rules 

of evidence, subpoena power, all of those things. But when you ask 

people without those other tools to then just decide who you agree 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

119 

with more, that is where you get an injustice. It is when you decouple preponderance from all of the other protections. 

Ms. RUE. I am going to have to disagree with that. Quite honestly, preponderance is the standard that precludes giving presumption for or against either party. It is the most equitable. Any 

other standard has already tipped the scale on who to believe. 

Ms. MAATZ. It is not only the most equitable; it is also the standard that most schools have been using throughout the years so that 

it is not new or different. 

The other part of the preponderance standard is that it is what 

is used when we are talking about, for instance, Title VII cases, 

civil cases that are dealing with these kinds of issues, which both 

have a civil remedy and maybe also could have some criminal implications. So the reality is this is something that schools understand, that they have been using for a long time, and that there 

is plenty of guidance from the Department of Education as to exactly how they should be using it. 

Everything is about being equitable, being fair, and being impartial. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Mr. Salmon’s time has expired. 

Mr. Jeffries, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. 

I thank the distinguished ranking member, as well, for his leadership, and all of the witnesses for your presence here today on 

such an important topic. 

I want to start my questioning with Mr. Cohn. 

So it is my understanding you advocate for weakening the Title 

IX process in the context of investigating campus sexual assault. Is 

that accurate? 

Mr. COHN. No. I mean, I wouldn’t characterize it as weakening 

Title IX at all. There are so many things that schools should be 

doing morally and legally under Title IX to make sure that campuses are safe places. Fact-finding just is not really one of the 

things they are equipped to do well. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Okay. But the Title IX process provides for campus 

adjudications, but you contend that those adjudications are illequipped and therefore that should be abandoned. Is that a fair 

characterization of your position? 

Mr. COHN. I think that would be a fair characterization. There 

is a long track record of the injustices against both accused and 

complainants when amateurs are handling these matters. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. And you have a greater degree of confidence in law 

enforcement and the criminal justice system to handle these— 

Mr. COHN. Right. 

Mr. JEFFRIES.—issues. Is that true? 

Mr. COHN. So there is no doubt that the criminal justice system 

is imperfect, but that is a persuasive argument for trying to fix and 

improve that. I have greater confidence in that system because it 

provides real tools and the actual structures that make sure that 

everyone’s rights are taken into account. 

And that is so important because I want them to get it right. I 

want to make sure that if there is a rapist on campus there are 

actual consequences that take them off the streets and protect people. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

120 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Right. But you acknowledge, of course, that the 

criminal justice system is imperfect, correct? 

Mr. COHN. Absolutely. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. And, you know, there are examples in the criminal 

justice system of people who have been sentenced to the death penalty who have subsequently been found to have been innocent, 

true? 

Mr. COHN. There is no system that is perfect. But the criminal 

justice system is dramatically better at doing this than campuses, 

again, because of the tools that they bring to bear— 

Mr. JEFFRIES. The reason the criminal justice system— 

Mr. COHN.—one that is awful and one that might not be very 

good. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. The reason the criminal justice system is imperfect—would you agree—is because of just the context of human 

error? And whenever you have got humans involved in the absence, 

perhaps, of adequate training, sensitivity, preparation, mistakes 

will be made. 

Mr. COHN. Absolutely. But that is why we have so many procedural tools in the criminal justice system to try to balance that out 

so individual bias can’t control that entire process; why we have 

meaningful appeals afterwards in the criminal justice system to 

provide additional levels of protection for error that don’t really 

exist in campuses where the appeal often goes to the same person 

that decided the case, which is why the Safe Campus Act includes 

that provision about no commingling of responsibilities. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Ms. Maatz, could you comment on, you know, 

whether you think there are meaningful protections and/or safeguards in the campus process as it relates to sexual assault, outside of the availability of the criminal justice system? 

Ms. MAATZ. There absolutely are meaningful protections. That is 

the whole point of Title IX; that is the whole point of the Clery Act, 

is to have colleges and universities examine those situations when 

they occur and to respond to them. 

And respectfully, I would say, with Mr. Salmon’s bill, if you make 

reporting mandatory to the police you have weakened Title IX. End 

of story. You have already said that it is not going to be a parallel 

process, that it is not going to be an equal process in terms of the 

emphasis. 

So that is a bill, I think, that would weaken Title IX at a time, 

quite frankly, when we need it to be strong and we need as much 

technical assistance as we can get from the Department of Education so schools can be the good actors they want to be. 

The reality is within the system they are supposed to have prevention training ongoing; they are supposed to be doing bystander 

intervention training ongoing; they are supposed to be training the 

folks who will be hearing these kinds of issues. And they have a 

choice as to what kind of format they will use in terms of administration hearing or student code of conduct. 

There is flexibility here so that they can match it to their school, 

match it to the circumstances, match it to the—to their community, 

so that they can get a just result. It is supposed to be impartial 

and fair, and I do believe that it is. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Thank you. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

121 

I would just note in closing, as my time is about to expire, that 

it does seem to me that to the extent that there are imperfections 

in the context of the campus adjudication process that we should 

mend it not end it and address issues perhaps endemic to the fact 

that human error exists in all contexts, just like human error exists in the criminal justice context. 

But we shouldn’t abandon the entire process, particularly given 

there is a long history in American jurisprudence of having a parallel process: the criminal adjudication process, the opportunity for 

people to pursue vindication through the civil adjudication process, 

which, as all of you have pointed out, uses a preponderance of the 

evidence standard, the same exact standard used in the campus adjudication process. 

Thank you for your testimony. 

I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Allen, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And thank you all for coming and sharing a—back when it— 

course, my kids say I am old-fashioned—back in my day we didn’t 

talk about things like this, other than—I will tell you this: Growing 

up, if I ever did anything to harm another—a woman, I had to answer to my father. And it was—even my little sister. She could hit 

me and I couldn’t hit her back, and that is the way I was taught. 

I have three grown daughters, and, course, full disclosure, my— 

I have a son and he attended Wake Forest University, and we were 

on the parents’ council there. And I will tell you this: They showed 

a film there to the parents’ council that they show every freshman 

at Wake Forest College about the problems with alcohol. 

That was the scariest thing I have ever seen in my life. And I 

tell you, any freshman that saw that obviously was prepared to 

know the consequences at least of misbehavior. 

Having three grown daughters, you know, I understand—I mean, 

you—when your kids go off to college, I mean, you just pray they 

will live through the experience, you know, because it is just—you 

know, I mean, they are free to do things that—and it—course, I 

went to college so I remember things I did I shouldn’t have done. 

But anyway, let me just say this, that would it be appropriate— 

like I said, I knew the consequences of my actions. Could colleges 

and universities—and I know it is very difficult to get in Wake Forest, for example. I mean, it is—my son thought it was a great 

honor to attend that university. 

But, I mean, can you read the riot act to these young men and 

just say, ‘‘You know, these are things that if you do you won’t be 

here next semester’’? 

Dr. Rue, would you—I mean, is that—I mean, looks like to me 

that this is a—the universities should set the pace on this and say, 

‘‘There are just some things we are not going to put up with here— 

put up here—put up with here at Wake Forest.’’ Can you comment 

on that? 

Ms. RUE. I would be happy to. I am going to go back to what 

CDC recommends in terms of multiple methods. 

We know that the parental voice is one that students tend to 

tune out at this time of their lives, as they struggle for independCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

122 

ence and define themselves. What we would say is that—and research shows—that if you approach men as brothers and boyfriends 

of people who might be assaulted, what you get is their empathy. 

And empathy is a much more powerful motivator than fear of some 

consequences. And you know, 18-year-olds think they are immortal, 

so— 

Mr. ALLEN. Right. 

Ms. RUE.—we really— 

Mr. ALLEN. Bulletproofs is what we call them. 

Ms. RUE. Yes. There you go. 

We believe that engaging men in the prevention effort as coaches, as peers, is way more powerful than finger-wagging them, and 

mobilizing their maturity and their ability to care for their dear 

friends who have been assaulted. So treating them as potential allies rather than as potential perpetrators is way more powerful. 

Mr. ALLEN. So I was not—when my daughters would date young 

men I would have them in, I would put the fear of God into them. 

That was the wrong idea? 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. RUE. With you, sir, I think it might work. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. ALLEN. Well, obviously, you know, we were very fortunate, 

but I have eight grandchildren and three on the way, and six of 

them are little girls. And I have got a 14-year-old, and of course, 

she is entering high school now, so I have had my little talk with 

her and—but, yes, it seems to me that in so many cases that young 

men just don’t know exactly right from wrong. I mean, they have 

been in—raised in an environment where they just don’t have a 

value system, and then they commit a horrible thing and it is like, 

‘‘What have I done here?’’ They really don’t know until the consequences are forced on them. 

So I would please just let, you know, your freshman class know— 

I know that alcohol—you know, they showed us a film in high 

school, the state patrol did, about driving, you know, and—of 

course, we didn’t have texting back then or phones back then—but 

basically not paying attention, and the consequences of that. And, 

you know, that stuff, it does register. 

And at least, you know, someone will know, ‘‘Well, gosh, I didn’t 

know there was anything wrong with this. I mean, you know, 

this—these are modern times,’’ or whatever. 

But anyway, anything else that, Ms. Maatz or Mr. Cohn, you 

would like to comment on how we—you gotta—we gotta stop it. 

Ms. MAATZ. Yes. 

Mr. ALLEN. How do we stop this? 

Ms. MAATZ. Well, and I think you have hit on a key point in 

terms of getting men involved. And the reality is, when you are 

doing this kind of programming, men as allies, not accusing, pointing fingers. 

‘‘We know that this happens. Here is what you can do about it 

because you have sisters, because you may have daughters, because you have friends that this could—this could impact.’’ 

That bystander intervention in particular can be particularly effective with men because they can distract, they can have another 

conversation. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

123 

And that peer pressure, you know? Never underestimate the 

power of the peer pressure. 

Right now in some respects it is working against us, in terms of 

campus sexual assault, in terms of the norms, in terms of the 

stereotypes. And we need to make it work for us. And I think working with men in the process is a great way to do that. 

The other thing I would say is that you need to bring in other 

folks from the entire community—not just fraternities and athletics 

departments, but the entire male community— 

Mr. ALLEN. Save that comment— 

Mr. COHN. May I have one— 

Chairwoman FOXX. Mr. Cohn, I am going to have to ask you to 

put it in writing. Thank you very much. 

Mr. COHN. Not a problem. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Mr. Polis, you are recognized. 

Mr. POLIS. Thank you. 

Mr. Cohn, is the problem that you have with the campus judicial 

processes, is it the standard or is it what you consider to be a 

flawed implementation of the standards they use, or both? 

Mr. COHN. I think both. 

Mr. POLIS. So, now, I mean, it certainly seems reasonable that 

a school, for its own purposes, might want to use a preponderance 

of evidence standard, or even a lower standard, perhaps a likelihood standard. I mean, we are talking about a private institution, 

and if I was running one I might say, ‘‘Well, you know, even if 

there is a 20 or a 30 percent chance that it happened I wouldn’t 

want a—would want to remove this individual.’’ 

Why shouldn’t a private institution, in the interest of promoting 

a safe environment, use an even lower standard than a preponderance of evidence, like a reasonable likelihood standard? 

Mr. COHN. Right. Private institutions operate under different 

rules than the public ones because the Constitution doesn’t necessarily apply. So that question has been answered in the public 

institutions so that due process is paramount and due process requires reasonable determinations, which you don’t get under the 

even lower standards of preponderance. 

Prior to the Department of Education— 

Mr. POLIS. So is the—the lowest standard use under due process 

is preponderance of evidence? 

Mr. COHN. The lowest standard you can use in a court for the 

fact-finding portion— 

Mr. POLIS. Okay. 

Mr. COHN.—would be preponderance. But that is— 

Mr. POLIS. Well, but I think we are talking about, again, a—now, 

so if you are saying—say it would be a public university, can they 

say, ‘‘We want to use a reasonable likelihood standard for purposes 

of expulsion or whether a student can reenroll’’? 

Mr. COHN. I don’t think that would have any chance of satisfying 

a due process challenge, but I also— 

Mr. POLIS. But a preponderance of evidence would. Is that— 

Mr. COHN. No. I mean, a preponderance of the evidence can in 

some circumstances pass it, and it could fail in others, depending 

on what other procedural protections it is coupled with. 

Mr. POLIS. Okay. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

124 

Mr. COHN. When a preponderance of the evidence— 

Mr. POLIS. Well, it seems like we ought to provide more of a legal 

framework, then, that allows a reasonable likelihood standard or a 

preponderance of evidence standard. I mean, if there are 10 people 

that have been accused and, you know, under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, it seems better to get rid 

of all 10 people. 

We are not talking about depriving them of life or liberty; we are 

talking about their transfer to another university, for crying out 

loud, or they go do something else. 

Mr. COHN. Well, let’s be more—let’s be— 

Mr. POLIS. I mean, you know, it is— 

Mr. COHN. Let’s be clear about this. That is not what we are 

talking about. 

Mr. POLIS. Let me move on. I have a question for Ms. Maatz. 

I want to thank you for your willingness to be here today, and 

I want to address specific concerns of sexual assault within the 

LGBT community. Polls have shown that 46 percent of bisexual 

women have been sexually assaulted and gay men are more than 

10 times more likely to experience sexual assault than heterosexual 

men; 25 percent of transgender people have been assaulted after 

age 13. 

What steps can schools take to ensure that sexual assault response teams and outreach is done in a culturally competent way 

regarding potential victims of sexual assault, including those who 

are sometimes marginalized and who identify as LGBT? 

Ms. MAATZ. Right. Those statistics obviously are horrible. And 

they are more likely to be sexually harassed, as well, so the whole 

continuum of violence is something, obviously, that we know 

LGBTQ people experience at a much higher rate. 

The great thing about Title IX, the beauty of it, is that it is a 

gender-neutral law, and so right from the get-go we have a tool 

that we can use for students to file a grievance if they would like 

to seek assistance. 

We have talked about having these advisors that could be helpful 

to students in telling them what their rights are, telling them what 

the process will be, helping them understand and talk about 

whether they want to file official charges or not, and all of that 

needs to be culturally competent and understand that sexual assault is not just a heterosexual phenomenon; it is something— 

Mr. POLIS. And along those lines, I think earlier where we were 

talking about engaging the men, engaging the men, I wanted to 

talk a minute about male victims, as well. What additional steps 

or outreach needs to be done with regard to reporting for male victims, for whom there could be a whole other set of issues, whether 

it is heterosexual or homosexual assault—or abuse? 

Ms. MAATZ. Well, I think there is a variety of things that can 

happen, but I do think in this instance technology is our friend: 

making sure that information that is culturally competent on these 

issues is available to students, that it is sent out to them regularly, 

that is on the website, that is available in the student code of conduct, that is in the health center, that is in places where gay students socialize and congregate. Making sure all of that is available 

is huge. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

125 

Mr. POLIS. And it is important to show that potential victims of 

sexual assault can be of all genders and all sexual orientations, as 

well. 

Ms. MAATZ. Absolutely. And so when you are training the folks 

who are going to be dealing with these cases, that has to be a huge 

element of it. It needs to be something that everyone understands. 

And, quite frankly, there is wonderful guidance from the Department of Education about how Title IX applies specifically not only 

in terms of campus sexual assault, but also harassment based on 

gender identity as well. 

Mr. POLIS. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Polis. 

Mr. Messer, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MESSER. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for holding 

this very important hearing. 

Thank you, to the witnesses, for being here as well. 

I am the father of a 12 and 11-year-old daughters and an 8-yearold son, and so they are not quite to college yet, but certainly an 

issue that means a lot to me. And we have several different college 

campuses on my—in my district, as well. 

You know, to reiterate what many of my colleagues have said, 

when parents send their children off to college they deserve to 

know that they should be safe. And frankly, if even one student 

doesn’t feel that way or isn’t that way, that is one too many. 

I wanted to give Mr. Cohn just a quick chance to respond to the 

comments. Just let me ask this question this way, and what can— 

so, given your testimony, what can colleges and universities do to 

improve their disciplinary processes in an effort to be more fair? 

Mr. COHN. Right. I mean, you know, our Plan A would obviously 

have them not be doing that. But in our Plan B, where tomorrow 

campuses will still be adjudicating these cases, it is important to 

include real, meaningful protections like a right to counsel and active assistance of counsel for both parties. 

By the time a school is trying to expel a student, they are not 

in the category of schools that is trying to sweep it under the rug, 

but they might not make the case particularly well. So having a 

lawyer who can speak up for the victim, you know, is also helpful 

to them to make sure the questions they want asked gets asked. 

So that is number one, the no comingling rule, so the same person 

who does the investigation isn’t also serving as judge, jury, and 

fact-finder. 

Making sure that you actually have the right to question, you 

know, the—you know, your accuser is important because we know 

that the ability to a confrontation type of clause is what helps us 

find truth. So there are ways that we can make it better. 

But I do want to be clear about one last thing: We are not talking about just expelling someone so they can go to another school. 

That is not what is going on, because when students get expelled 

it tracks them for the remainder of their life. 

Forget about getting a job with security clearance here in this 

town. Not too many schools are lining up to admit people who have 

been expelled for sexual assault elsewhere. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

126 

And again, the statements are admissible against them in criminal court. You are having 18-year-olds talk on the record about 

felonies that can put them in jail in Virginia, you know, or Missouri for the remainder of their lives. 

Mr. MESSER. Well, reclaiming my time, I mean, I think we all 

recognize that this is a serious, important crime, needs to be dealt 

with, needs to be dealt with in a way that practically works. And 

so kind of opening up to the broader panel, I wanted to talk just 

a second and get some counsel. 

As Congress is working through these issues, of course we have 

to deal—we have to work through the intersection between the sort 

of local law enforcement issues and the campus-based disciplinary 

processes that are in place to deal with student discipline, as well, 

and I think that our legislation needs to recognize and accommodate those differences. So could we get maybe some testimony on 

how to work through that? 

Ms. SCADUTO. I would be happy to at least pile on, if you will, 

on the issue. 

The goals and objectives of our internal discipline processes are 

different than those of the criminal justice system, and I think 

what has been lost over the last 4.5 years in the efforts of government and other interested parties to make sure that there is accountability for sexual violence on our campuses is the waters are 

muddied right now about what is the purpose of an on-campus disciplinary proceeding? 

I will not call it a judicial proceeding. We are not going to find 

someone guilty of a crime; we are going to be looking at conduct 

in the framework of our campus community and our campus culture. 

As Congress moves forward, as OCR moves forward, we need to 

tease out—and I addressed this in my written comments to this 

subcommittee—we need to tease out what is the purpose that you 

see for an on-campus discipline process. I can’t speak for Dr. Rue, 

and I would ask her to answer quickly on her own behalf, but I believe there are very different purposes. 

And please keep in mind that not every incident of sexual—of a 

violation of our sexual misconduct policies is sexual assault. It— 

Mr. MESSER. So invite Dr. Rue to also respond? 

Ms. RUE. Yes, certainly. 

Again, we are trying to determine whether or not we have a safe 

and effective educational environment and whether our policies 

have been violated. We are perfectly comfortable with individuals 

choosing both pathways—choosing a criminal justice pathway and 

the university pathway. 

No quarrel. We really believe the student should be able to decide that. 

But our goal is to make sure we can remediate our own environment if needed through understanding what the risks are, and to 

making sure we are lowering barriers to individuals reporting right 

now, because that is our biggest concern. We know that the incidence, established by polls and studies, is nowhere near the number of reports, and we would like to close that gap, and we don’t 

believe that approach would do so. 

Mr. MESSER. Thank you for your testimony. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

127 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you. Gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. Bonamici, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Chair Foxx and Ranking 

Member Hinojosa. Thank you for having me join your subcommittee today. 

This is a topic that has been of import in my state of Oregon as 

well as across the country. We have had a lot of conversations 

about it. And in fact, just last week I had a great discussion hosted 

by Portland State University with our Oregon institutions, primarily the Title IX coordinators. 

There are a lot of common themes that we heard today not only 

emphasizing the importance of the issue but the regulatory overlap 

and sometimes conflict—I think you will find a lot of support 

among this committee for clarifying that; but also the resources 

needed to address these issues. 

And I am glad we have had a lot of conversations this morning 

about prevention and the importance of educating students about 

healthy relationships, consent and what that means, healthy sexual encounters. And I am glad we are talking about that before college—before they get to college. 

Now, there were some conversations about the Teach Safe Relationships Act. There is a House version, which I am proud to cosponsor, along with a couple of other members of this committee. 

I do invite the other committee members and other colleagues to 

take a look at that and join on because if we are preventing, that 

is the best approach. 

So we know we can take stronger steps not only in prevention, 

we want to make sure that survivors of sexual assault have access 

to resources, services, and privacy on and off campus. And I want 

to emphasize that we really need to have policies that encourage 

not discourage survivors from reporting and seeking counseling and 

assistance. 

Dr. Rue, you discuss the important role of confidential advisors, 

and that is something that we are seeing in more institutions. 

Now, earlier this year I wrote a letter to the Department of Education about an apparent loophole in FERPA. In some circumstances, attorneys for an institution can access students’ counseling records without a court order. 

The Department of Education’s recent draft guidance to address 

this issue is encouraging, and I look forward to working with the 

administration and advocates and colleagues to close that loophole 

and provide survivors with the support and assurance of privacy. 

We want them to be safe and we want them to feel safe, and if they 

have a sense that their records are not going to be kept confidential, that may discourage them from seeking the support that they 

need. 

So my home state is working on this issue. Earlier this year our 

governor, Kate Brown, signed legislation making clear that conversations between alleged campus assault survivors and their advocates are confidential. 

Oregon also passed a bill that requires schools to give students 

who report sexual assaults written notification about their rights, 

legal options, campus services, and the state and community resources. And I just want to give a shout-out to Brenda Tracy, a 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

128 

brave survivor of a gang rape on a campus several years ago, who 

is now a nurse and an advocate. 

So these policies are important for students not only in Oregon 

but, you know, across the country, and I am really glad we are having these conversations today. 

And I want to ask you, Ms. Maatz, we know that more institutions are starting to educate students about their rights under Title 

IX. Oregon State University, for example, is going to be opening a 

survivor advocacy center to provide confidential and accessible 

services; they are going to have a full-time advocate there. 

So what can we do to expand services like that so more students 

know their rights? And what is the best way to let survivors know 

what resources are available to them on and off campus, and also 

let all students know that, not just survivors? They need to know 

what is there, and the best way to do that. 

Ms. MAATZ. Right. Well, Title IX absolutely requires schools to 

not only put together an anti-discrimination policy, but to also have 

grievance procedures and, most importantly, to publish it in an ongoing way, to publicize it to students, to faculty, to staff. And technology can be our friend there, in terms of making sure that it is 

distributed frequently. It should also be used, obviously, in any oncampus prevention programs, and so forth. 

I would like to get back, truthfully, to the climate surveys, because one of the things that I think is overlooked with the tool of 

the climate surveys is that it does give an opportunity for students 

to talk about their experiences. And in a climate— 

Ms. BONAMICI. And reclaiming my time, I wanted to get to that 

issue, so in the few remaining seconds, could you talk about—because there is such a diversity among colleges and universities in 

size and resources, and we want meaningful responses. So do you 

have any suggestions about how we can accomplish that in a nationwide climate survey so that we get equity in response and distribution and participation? 

Ms. MAATZ. Right. Well, we need to actually make sure that 

there are certain questions that all climate surveys ask. I think 

that is very important. The HALT Act would do climate surveys, 

and we need to have that generalizability across the country. 

At the same time, each campus can personalize that particular 

climate survey to make sure they are asking questions key for their 

community, key for their constituents. And what is good about that 

is that it not only provides information to the school about what 

they should be doing—what they are doing that students don’t like, 

what they are doing that could be better—but it lets the students 

know that the university is paying attention, that there are these 

programs, that there are these rights, that there are these protections. And that in and of itself is a huge community education program as well as a data-finding program that helps to make things 

better. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Terrific. 

My time is expired. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you. 

Ms. BONAMICI. I yield back. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman FOXX. I understand that Congresswoman Speier 

would like to speak, and I ask unanimous— 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

129 

Mr. HINOJOSA. I ask unanimous consent that she be allowed and 

permitted to join the committee members for today and participate 

in this important hearing. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Without objection, Congresswoman Speier is 

recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. SPEIER. Thank you very much for allowing me to participate 

today. I apologize for not being here for the entire hearing—excuse 

me. I had a funeral to attend. 

But I want to applaud the committee for recognizing the gravity 

of this issue and the importance of putting a spotlight on the issue 

and coming up with some solutions to dealing with it. I am sure 

you have undertaken a complete review with the panelists that are 

with us today, who are—many of whom are experts, about the fact 

that this is, indeed, a very serious problem. Regardless of how you 

crunch the numbers, the incidence is widespread on college campuses and we need to take steps to address it. 

Let me say at the outset that I have worked on this issue now 

for over 2 years. I have worked very closely with my colleague on 

the other side of the aisle, Pat Meehan, and we have introduced 

the HALT Act. 

But in doing all of this we have spent time with the Office of 

Civil Rights, and I want to commend them. The OCR within the 

Department of Education in the last couple of years has done an 

outstanding job of creating greater accountability, frankly, because 

we have seen for a very long period of time that the Title IX coordinators on most college campuses weren’t even available to people. 

They were oftentimes buried in Web sites. 

That all is changing now due in large part to dear colleagues letters that have been sent out by OCR and others. 

It is personal to me because I have a daughter who is in college, 

and every college that we visited before she chose the college that 

she is now at, the first question that was asked by every parent— 

the first question when we were at orientations was what was the 

safety of that college for their child. 

And this is a bipartisan issue, Madam Chair. I can’t tell you the 

number of Republican fathers and Republican mothers who have 

said to me, ‘‘I am really upset that this issue hasn’t been dealt with 

appropriately.’’ And frankly, sometimes it is not until you are six 

degrees of separation that you appreciate how close it can come to 

you. 

So climate surveys, which we have used very effectively in dealing with sexual assault in the military and has been used in the 

military for a long period of time, is something that we want to see 

incorporated by universities. It is a picture that helps them appreciate how significant the issue is. 

The HALT Act will also provide for a number of other elements. 

You know, one of the things that Title IX does, it has a—it is a 

heavy hammer. If you aren’t providing the kind of nondiscrimination in education you can lose all your federal funding, which 

means you lose all the grant money, you lose the option for student 

loans. And so it is a heavy hammer. 

But it is, I think, important to create a system that provides 

some fiscal penalties short of that heavy hammer, and the HALT 

Act would do that. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

130 

It would also increase the violations—the penalties for violations 

to the Clery Act from $35,000 to $100,000 and create a private 

right of action under Clery for students whose institutions failed to 

inform them of safety risks and of their rights. 

It provides more money for investigators in the Office of Civil 

Rights by about 5 million and—as an effort to decrease the backlog 

that exists right now with the Title IX complaints that have been 

filed. 

Now, I spoke to a number of young women who had been assaulted at the University of California. I won’t name the campus 

so they won’t be drawn that closely under the microscope. 

But in talking to these young women—and there is nothing like 

hearing the stories of these youngsters to appreciate how insidious 

this can be. And in many of those cases, the victims were never 

even interviewed. 

That may be shocking to some of you, but that was commonplace. 

And how can you properly evaluate a case unless you interview 

both the perpetrator, or alleged perpetrator, and the victim as well? 

The question as to whether or not colleges should be engaged in 

this at all—and, Ms. Scaduto, you had referenced that a few moments ago—you know, is probably a legitimate question. You all 

have codes of conduct, though, and under that code of conduct, if 

you violate that code of conduct you take actions to remove those 

individuals from the campus. 

So you certainly have the wherewithal, and you certainly use 

that code of conduct in dismissing or suspending students who 

don’t comply with the rules of the university. And I would suggest 

by being engaged in something that is clearly a crime, which rape 

is, that meets the standard of suspending or terminating a student. 

But I also appreciate that you, you know, have to weigh the various interests. 

I do think that the Office of Civil Rights needs more resources. 

I do think that we should create a proactive responsibility that institutions, you know, plaster the notices of how you can seek Title 

IX coordinators in the bathrooms of every dorm and sorority and 

fraternity, and those simple things. The HALT Act goes beyond 

that. 

And I see my time is expired, and I thank, again, the chair for 

the opportunity to participate. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you very much. 

I want to thank our witnesses again for taking time to be here 

today. 

I would like to recognize the ranking member for any closing 

comments. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Madam Chair, before I give my closing statement, 

I ask unanimous consent that the following five documents be submitted into the hearing record: number one, the U.S. Department 

of Education’s 2014 guidance on Title IX and sexual violence; number two, U.S. Department of Education’s list of higher education institutions with open Title IX sexual violation investigations as of 

September 2, 2015; number three, U.S. Department of Education’s 

table chart Title IX, Clery Act, FERPA; number four, the letter 

from the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence; and lastly, 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

131 

number five, the letter from Feminist Majority Foundation. I ask 

unanimous consent that be done. 

[The information follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

132 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 85 here 96035.085
133 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 86 here 96035.086
134 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 87 here 96035.087
135 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 88 here 96035.088
136 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 89 here 96035.089
137 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 90 here 96035.090
138 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 91 here 96035.091
139 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 92 here 96035.092
140 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 93 here 96035.093
141 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 94 here 96035.094
142 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 95 here 96035.095
143 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 96 here 96035.096
144 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 97 here 96035.097
145 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 98 here 96035.098
146 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 99 here 96035.099
147 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 100 here 96035.100
148 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 101 here 96035.101
149 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 102 here 96035.102
150 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 103 here 96035.103
151 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 104 here 96035.104
152 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 105 here 96035.105
153 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 106 here 96035.106
154 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 107 here 96035.107
155 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 108 here 96035.108
156 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 109 here 96035.109
157 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 110 here 96035.110
158 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 111 here 96035.111
159 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 112 here 96035.112
160 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 113 here 96035.113
161 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 114 here 96035.114
162 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 115 here 96035.115
163 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 116 here 96035.116
164 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 117 here 96035.117
165 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 118 here 96035.118
166 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 119 here 96035.119
167 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 120 here 96035.120
168 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 121 here 96035.121
169 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 122 here 96035.122
170 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 123 here 96035.123
171 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 124 here 96035.124
172 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 125 here 96035.125
173 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 126 here 96035.126
174 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 127 here 96035.127
175 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 128 here 96035.128
176 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 129 here 96035.129
177 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 130 here 96035.130
178 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 131 here 96035.131
179 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 132 here 96035.132
180 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 133 here 96035.133
181 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 134 here 96035.134
182 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 135 here 96035.135
183 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 136 here 96035.136
184 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 137 here 96035.137
185 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 138 here 96035.138
186 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 139 here 96035.139
187 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 140 here 96035.140
188 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 141 here 96035.141
189 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 142 here 96035.142
190 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 143 here 96035.143
191 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 144 here 96035.144
192 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 145 here 96035.145
193 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 146 here 96035.146
194 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 147 here 96035.147
195 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 148 here 96035.148
196 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 149 here 96035.149
197 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 150 here 96035.150
198 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 151 here 96035.151
199 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 152 here 96035.152
200 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 153 here 96035.153
201 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 154 here 96035.154
202 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 155 here 96035.155
203 

Chairwoman FOXX. Without objection. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you. 

For my closing statement I would like to thank all of our witnesses for spending their time with us at this important hearing 

this morning. 

A combination of publicity and heightened scrutiny is leading colleges across the entire nation to place more emphasis than ever on 

preventing and responding to sexual assault on their campuses. 

Sometimes victims of these horrendous crimes do not know who or 

where to turn because they believe no one will understand them or 

they believe that reporting a crime could bring them much more 

harm. 

This is why it is imperative that institutions of higher education 

which deal directly with our students have the resources to provide 

the victims of sexual assault and the accused with help and comfort so that they and those affected by that crime will fully recover 

and not miss out on their educational opportunity. 

And with that, I yield back. 

Chairwoman FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Hinojosa. 

Again, I want to thank our witnesses. 

I want to thank everyone who came here today. 

I especially want to thank our staff for the excellent work done 

on putting this hearing together. 

And in the interest of time at the beginning I did not acknowledge that Dr. Rue is from Wake Forest, which is in my district, and 

I am very grateful to her and for that wonderful, wonderful institution that is there. 

I want to say that I deplore violence of any kind. I don’t even 

watch any kind of movies with violence in them because I cannot 

abide violence. 

And this is a very important issue. It is important to all of us. 

Again, I have a grandson who went off to college this fall for the 

first time, so those of us in particular, again, who have children at 

colleges and universities, but every American, everybody on a college campus deserves to have a safe environment to learn. We 

want that for all of our students. 

And so I believe that today’s hearing has brought forth some important information that will inform us as we go forward in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, and I appreciate, again, 

the witnesses, my colleagues who came and asked very thoughtful 

questions, and everyone who is here to learn more about this issue. 

There being no further business, the subcommittee stands adjourned. 

[Additional submissions by Mr. Hinojosa] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

204 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 156 here 96035.156
205 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 157 here 96035.157
206 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 158 here 96035.158
207 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 159 here 96035.159
208 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 160 here 96035.160
209 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 161 here 96035.161
210 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 162 here 96035.162
211 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 163 here 96035.163
212 

[Additional submissions by Salmon]167-169 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

213 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 167 here 96035.167
214 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 168 here 96035.168
215 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 169 here 96035.169
216 

[Questions submitted for the record and their responses follow:]176-179 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

217 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 176 here 96035.176
218 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 177 here 96035.177
219 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 178 here 96035.178
220 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 179 here 96035.179
221 

[Responses to questions submitted or the record follow:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

222 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 180 here 96035.180
223 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 181 here 96035.181
224 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 182 here 96035.182
225 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 183 here 96035.183
226 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 184 here 96035.184
227 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 185 here 96035.185
228 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 186 here 96035.186
229 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 187 here 96035.187
230 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 188 here 96035.188
231 

[Whereupon, at 12:13 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER