Table of Contents
Can the University of Montana Deliver the Constitutional, OCR-Compliant Sexual Harassment Policy It Promised?
Last week in Escalating Registers, Kenyon College student Henri Gendreau took a critical look at the controversy surrounding the Departments of Education and Justice鈥檚 鈥渂lueprint鈥 for campus sexual harassment policies. Despite the fact that the Department of Education鈥檚 Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has explicitly rejected the University of Montana鈥檚 standards for campus sexual harassment, UMT administrators remain confident that they can find a solution that works for everyone. 蜜桃直播 is skeptical, to say the least. In Gendreau鈥檚 article, 蜜桃直播鈥檚 Robert Shibley challenged the assertion that students can engage in 鈥渟exual harassment鈥 outside of the hostile environment context: 鈥淲hat OCR has actually done here is go sort of another step, and they have defined sexual harassment as 鈥榰nwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.鈥 What they鈥檙e saying is that that鈥檚 sexual harassment, even if it doesn鈥檛 rise to the level of creating a hostile environment,鈥 said Robert L. Shibley.... 鈥淣ow that鈥檚 new. As far as I know, there鈥檚 never been a third kind of sexual harassment that isn鈥檛 either quid pro quo or hostile environment; those are the two kinds of sexual harassment.鈥 Gendreau also talked to Susan Carle, a professor at American University鈥檚 Washington College of Law, who remarked on OCR鈥檚 rejection of UMT鈥檚 requirement that sexual harassment be objectively offensive to a reasonable person: While Carle believes the definition the departments outline is not 鈥渁 big new thing,鈥 she added, 鈥渢hey鈥檙e definitely making sexual harassment broader in definition than the U.S. Supreme Court would accept.鈥 UMT General Counsel Lucy France, like her colleague Peggy Kuhr, has interpreted the federal blueprint as a more general requirement that harassment be properly dealt with鈥攏ot as a requirement that UMT adopt a particular definition of sexual harassment. France is therefore confident that UMT can strike the right balance: 鈥淲e will adopt a definition that we feel reflects the current status of the law and addresses sex-based discrimination and we鈥檙e not being asked to adopt one or the other,鈥 France said. 鈥淓ven speech that is offensive, we need to protect. Absolutely.鈥 But it is unclear how UMT can craft a policy that is both constitutional and acceptable to OCR, when OCR has already refused to accept elements of UMT鈥檚 old policy that were constitutionally required. Gendreau reports: On May 26, the University of Montana adopted a draft of its discrimination policy, which includes a lengthy section on sexual harassment. In it, the draft notes both an objective and subjective standard is applied to determine sexual harassment, and that 鈥渁 serious incident, even if isolated, can be sufficient,鈥 rather than a hostile environment standard. [Emphasis added.] This draft already seems to contradict OCR鈥檚 blueprint, which unambiguously states: Whether conduct is objectively offensive is a factor used to determine if a hostile environment has been created, but it is not the standard to determine whether conduct was 鈥渦nwelcome conduct of a sexual nature鈥 and therefore constitutes 鈥渟exual harassment.鈥 Or are we to understand that both an objective and subjective standard are applied to determine only whether there is a hostile environment? Who knows? 蜜桃直播 tried to reach UMT鈥檚 Equal Opportunity & Affirmative Action Office to obtain a copy of the policy draft so we could see whether the policy included such a specification, but it鈥檚 been several days and the office has not returned our call. To be clear, 蜜桃直播 encourages universities to maintain policies that are consistent with the First Amendment, even if those policies conflict with OCR鈥檚 blueprint. But they should do so purposefully and openly鈥攂ecause OCR鈥檚 demands are unconstitutional. Of course, 蜜桃直播 will post an update as soon as UMT releases the full policy. In the meantime, check out Escalating Registers for Gendreau鈥檚 thoughtful assessment of the blueprint and how it could affect student speech and press.Want to know more about the ED/DOJ "blueprint"? Check out FIRE's Frequently Asked Questions here!
Recent Articles
FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Detaining 脰zt眉rk over an op-ed is unlawful and un-American

Day 100! Abridging the First Amendment: Zick releases major resource report on Trump鈥檚 executive orders 鈥 First Amendment News 468聽

VICTORY! Tenn. town buries unconstitutional ordinance used to punish holiday skeleton display
