Columbia University: Violation of Due Process Rights in Sexual Misconduct Policy

Case Materials

  • "Columbia's Slow, Secret Steps Toward Justice; Sexual Misconduct Policy Still a Bizarre Patchwork of Outrages," FIRE Press Release, December 7, 2001: In an effort to address FIRE's criticisms, Columbia University inconspicuously has altered its abhorrent Sexual Misconduct Policy. The Policy still represents an unconscionable violation of fundamental fairness and due process.
  • "Columbia Belatedly Embraces Free Speech, But for Whom?," FIRE Press Release, November 8, 2001: Columbia's University Senate never paid much attention to free speech. Last week, when voting to affirm a commitment to this core value, they entered new territory. FIRE asks, what took them so long?
  • "Resolution Reaffirming Free and Open Debate in the Aftermath of Recent Terrorist Attacks," October 26, 2001
  • "Columbia: New Year, Same Injustice," October 19, 2001: Columbia students return to an abhorrent sexual misconduct policy that Columbia will not defend, but that it will impose upon its campus
  • "Columbia's Abhorrent New Sexual Misconduct Policy," September 28, 2001
  • "Columbia's Former Sexual Misconduct Policy," September 27, 2001
  • "Columbia's Nightmarish Sexual Misconduct Policy: One Step Forward and Two Steps Back," July 16, 2001: In a breathtaking U-turn, Columbia University, after months of public criticism, has stated that its "model" Sexual Misconduct Policy was, in fact, a "draft" in need of specific rules and procedures. Despite this astonishing but useful deceit, Columbia admitted to the Chronicle of Higher Education (July 6, 2001) that at least one student was prosecuted under its unfinished policy. The Chronicle asked Columbia's general counsel: "How was he tried when there were no specific rules in place to guide the proceedings?" The deer-in-headlights reply of Patricia S. Catapano, Columbia's associate general counsel, was: "It's a question we're not prepared to answer," demonstrating the moral consequences of Columbia's unfair, indecent, and unjust policy.
  • "Petition to Overturn Columbia's Sexual Misconduct Policy, May 16, 2001," May 16, 2001
  • "Columbia University Unable to Defend Policy in Public," FIRE Press Release, March 13, 2001: The Columbia University administration, although invited by Columbia students, faculty, and parents, did not show up at a campus discussion of its controversial new Sexual Misconduct Policy. A few days later, Columbia refused to participate in a highly rated television news program discussing the policy. Columbia's new sexual misconduct policy lacks even the most minimal safeguards and fundamental principles of fairness. Indeed, it lacks virtually all safeguards long considered by civilized societies to be essential for a reliable search for truth. Columbia came under national scrutiny six months ago when FIRE began a campaign to overturn the dangerous and now discredited policy. In the past few weeks, the policy's initial supporters have engaged in ad hominem attacks, public vandalism, censorship, and, in a bizarre eleventh-hour twist, an about-face calling for reform of their own policy.

Media Coverage