The pending legislation entitled the “Safe Campus Act” has become quite a polarizing subject since its conception this July and especially during recent weeks. This act was esentially formed as an attempt to add more structure in how universities and police forces handle he rampant problem of sexual assault on college campuses. However, it has recieved overwhelming backlash due to the restrictions that it places on sexual assault victims and the available options open to them to deal with carrying out retribution for the crime and against their alleged attacker. The most impactful and talked-about aspect is the imposition of requiring ciminal charges to have been pressed against an attacker in order for a university to become involved. In turn, this would prohibit a university from carrying out any form of protective action for the victim without police involvement. Many believe that this infringes on a victim’s rights, stripping them of the ability to deal with a sensitive case in whatever manner they may deem preferable. Additionally, it has been repeatedly called out as a ploy for universities to avoid accountability and bad press in exchange for their students’ safety. Others argue that it simply promotes due process for all students accused of sexual assault. This act then begs the question: which takes precedence, protection of student rights for the accused or the accusing and/or can they both be equally appeased?
Previously, the bill had powerful supporters such as the North-American Interfraternity Council as well as the National Panhellenic Council, which govern fraternity and sorority organizations.The pulled support of such organizations has contributed to the overall decreasing support of the act’s passage. Within the past week, these groups have pulled their support, largely due to the the opposition of individual Greek organizations. Alpha Phi was the first sorority to break from the pack and announce their disapproval of the act, which then almost immediately led five more sororities to follow suit the next day and all of NPC and NIC closely following behind.
Pictured above are Clair McCaskill and Kirsten Gillibrand; senators and former collegiate sorority women; who have been speaking out fiercely against the act from the start. It is interesting to note that certain fraternities were not seemingly on board with the new stance of NIC. Specifically, Sigma Nu, Kappa Alpha Order and Alpha Tau Omega, hired prominent Washington lobbyist, Trent Lott, to further lobby for the passage of the Safe Campus Act. (Lott and national leaders for Kappa Alpha Order, Sigma Nu and ATO are pictured below) On the contrary, Lambda Chi Alpha disaffiliated from NIC due to their disapproval of their lobbying for this act. This is a testament to the wide spectrum of opinions that have been surrounding this issue within the Greek organizations.
Though there have long been innumerable organizations to vehemently speak out against the act (over 200 groups that focus on helping sexual assault victims sent a collective letter to congress expressing disdain for the case) it was not until the governing bodies of Greek announced their opposition that it became a notable national topic to many collegiate students.
Though support for the Safe Campus Act by Greek Life has officially ended, many do not realize that the NPC and NIC are still in support and lobbying for a closely related bill, entitled the “Fair Campus Act”. Despite certain organizations’ stated disapproval of the “Fair Campus Act”, these overall umbrella organizations for sororities and fraternities still support this very similar act.
This act differs from the “Safe Campus Act” only slightly in the sense that it does not require a police report to be made by the victim in order for any form of action to be taken. On the contrary, it does require a formal hearing to be completed in order for permanent action to be taken on the university’s end. The proposed hearings will not take place, however, if the victim does not provide evidence of the crime within a two week window. Additionally, victims and those accused are permitted to use legal representation throughout the hearing but are not provided attorneys by the school.
Whether you see this difference as monumental in the nature of the case, it is important to acknowledge the similarity and differences between the acts. It does not appear that the discussion is anyway near over regarding campus sexual assault and the handling of the matter on both the police and university end. Every college student is entitled to their opinion towards these acts but it is their responsibility to be informed on the facts of each in order to form an educated stance on such an vital topic: their safety.
Read the Fair Campus Act and the Safe Campus Act for yourself here on Congress’ site!