Dartblog

Purportedly to protect students but more often for the purposes of enforcing code that would never exist or survive in the public arena—and code which is often politically-motived—private colleges tend to construct faux legal edifices that ensconce all students in a vice-like grip. The most commonly understood product of these nebulous legal enterprises is the notion that an accusation of sexual assault equals a conviction. This is enabled through the very popular ‘eh’ principle of evidentiary standards. In practice, this means that the burden of proof has been met when the presiding professor or administrator shrugs his shoulders, wrinkles his brow, nibbles on his glasses, and says, ‘eh’.

As is clear, I don’t wave the flag for these fantasy legal systems. I tend to think that crimes and torts ought to be decided by real judges in real courts with actual hardwood benches. Oh, and the whole idea of non-hermetically sealed trial rooms and not forcing non-disclosure agreements down defendants’ throats is excellent, too. But as we all must say, these are private institutions and they may do what they will. There is a rather good argument to be made, I think, that colleges simply ought not be in the business of adjudication. But that is for another day.

For now, it is worthwhile to observe that occasionally, targets of College Justice try to sidle the conflict into real court. I know this has happened several times in recent memory at Dartmouth, with very little success for students. Not, to my understanding, because of the merits of the cases but because of procedural or jurisdictional issues pushed forth by the institutions in question.

One student at another school, however, just won big. You’ll recall the sad story of Scott McConnell, a graduate student of education at Le Moyne College, a small private New York “Catholic college founded in the Jesuit tradition.” Scott was an A-student, taking classes in the art of teaching. Last year, he was assigned an essay on which he received an A-minus. He wrote in opposition to multiculturalism and in favor of corporal punishment. More specifically, he supported “light spanking.” Upon further review and despite the high mark, his professor told Scott that he had “grave concerns regarding the mismatch between your personal beliefs regarding teaching and learning and the LeMoyne College program goals…. You will not be allowed to register for any additional courses. Your registration for Spring 2005 courses has been withdrawn.”

Scott was expelled.

Enter the Rule of Law and its illustrious sire, the United States Constitution. Scott McConnell took Le Moyne College to court and, after a tiresome haul which included a lower court refusing to hear the case at all, a New York Court of Appeals yesterday ruled that the college denied Scott his due process rights and that he is thereby reinstated as an enrolled student. Confetti. Champagne. Love.

It was certainly not a whole victory. The court relied not upon the actual due process rights given to American citizens, but upon the token due process rights guaranteed students in their handbook. It is still a small step, however.