We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Chapter 7 conducts part two of the deeper dive into the new regulations, but here the focus is on the changes made to the investigation and adjudication of sexual assault. The chapter explains the ways in which the new procedures differ from those under the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter, and how they better protect complainants and the accused. In considering the fairness of the new procedures, the chapter compares them to the consensus recommendations of the 2017 ABA Criminal Justice Section Task Force on Campus Due Process and Victim Protection. Along the way, suggestions are offered for how schools can implement the new regulations in a way that is compliant with those regulations but better protects the rights of victims and the accused.
Chapter 5 evaluates the fairness of DCL-influenced proceedings under two theories: violation of procedural due process and breach of contract for failure to comport with basic procedural fairness. The first, which is grounded in the U.S. Constitution, provides a stronger basis for recovery. However, it requires state action, which means it is probably only available to public school students. The chapter argues that under either theory, the procedural protections provided are inadequate.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.