You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Friday that a former Yale student acquitted of raping a fellow student could sue his accuser for defamation, the Associated Press reported.
The justices ruled 7 to 0 that Jane Doe, as the accuser is called, is not immune from a defamation lawsuit because the accused had fewer rights to defend himself in Yale’s disciplinary process, which is not “quasi-judicial,” than he would have in criminal court. At Yale—as at many universities—accusers in sexual assault disciplinary proceedings are not subject to cross-examination, nor are witnesses required to testify under oath.
Violence prevention groups expressed fear that the ruling would further deter sexual assault victims from coming forward.
“Without protections from retaliation, including absolute immunity, victims will be dissuaded from using school reporting and disciplinary processes and will lose out on their education while perpetrators dodge accountability,” a lawyer representing the violence prevention groups wrote.
The decision marks one of the few state rulings on such a case in any U.S. court, and legal experts believe it could set a precedent for similar cases in the future.
“It was striking to me how detailed they were in criticizing the fairness of the Yale procedures,” Brooklyn College history professor K. C. Johnson told the AP. “There are passages from the opinion that I suspect will be quoted in basically every accused student’s brief moving forward.”
The ruling comes as higher ed institutions await the Biden administration's changes to Title IX regulations, slated for October, which are expected to undo the Trump administration’s shift to allow accusers to face cross-examination.
