I regret that I cannot attend the meeting today because of my teaching schedule. I was given a chance to submit commentary and to speak at last month’s meeting. I would like only to emphasize today that my argument in favor of ensuring that any student accused of sexual violence be given a hearing is primarily a moral rather than a legal argument. Even though Cornell may be able to get away with offering lesser due process protections to a student accused of sexual violence because of its categorization by the courts as a largely private university, its students deserve the protections given to students at public institutions because this is simply the right thing to do. Cornell owes it to its students to make sure that any decision that may impose severe consequences upon them be subjected to rigorous examination, such as that available at a hearing at which both parties appear to present evidence and are given a chance to rebut evidence presented by the opposing party. It is a foundation of our legal system that the fairest “investigator” will not produce as accurate a picture of the facts as that which emerges from a confrontational hearing in front of a neutral tribunal.

A student expelled for a sexual offense will face the consequences of that finding for the rest of his or her life. Cornell’s students in that position should therefore be given the due process protections that would be theirs if they had enrolled at a state university. Although this process may not be as administratively convenient as some others, I believe that those who have committed sexual offenses will continue to be, as they have been in the past under the Campus Code, given serious sanctions for that behavior, while ensuring that those who may be innocent are protected. Whether these procedures take place under the Code or under University Policy 6.4, a hearing should be required.