An administrative right to be free from sexual violence? Title IX enforcement in historical and institutional perspective.

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Duke Law Journal Pub Date : 2017-01-01
Karen M Tani
{"title":"An administrative right to be free from sexual violence? Title IX enforcement in historical and institutional perspective.","authors":"Karen M Tani","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One of the most controversial administrative actions in recent years is the U.S. Department of Education's campaign against sexual assault on college campuses. Using its authority under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (mandating nondiscrimination on the basis of sex in all educational programs and activities receiving federal funds), the Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has launched an enforcement effort that critics denounce as aggressive, manipulative, and corrosive of individual liberties. Missing from the commentary is a historically informed understanding of why this administrative campaign unfolded as it did. This Article offers crucial context by reminding readers that freedom from sexual violence was once celebrated as a national civil right--upon the enactment of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994--but then lost that status in a 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. OCR's recent campaign reflects a legal and political landscape in which at least some potential victims of sexual violence had come to feel rightfully connected to the institutions of the federal government, and then became righteously outraged by the endurance of such violence in their communities. OCR's campaign also reflects the unique role of federal administrative agencies in this landscape. Thanks to the power of the purse and the conditions that\nCongress has attached to funding streams, agencies enjoy a powerful form of jurisdiction over particular spaces and institutions. Attempts to harness this jurisdiction in service of aspirational rights claims should not surprise us; indeed, we should expect such efforts to continue. Building on this insight, the Article concludes with a research agenda for other scholars seeking to understand and evaluate OCR’s handiwork.</p>","PeriodicalId":47625,"journal":{"name":"Duke Law Journal","volume":"66 8","pages":"1847-903"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Duke Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One of the most controversial administrative actions in recent years is the U.S. Department of Education's campaign against sexual assault on college campuses. Using its authority under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (mandating nondiscrimination on the basis of sex in all educational programs and activities receiving federal funds), the Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has launched an enforcement effort that critics denounce as aggressive, manipulative, and corrosive of individual liberties. Missing from the commentary is a historically informed understanding of why this administrative campaign unfolded as it did. This Article offers crucial context by reminding readers that freedom from sexual violence was once celebrated as a national civil right--upon the enactment of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994--but then lost that status in a 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. OCR's recent campaign reflects a legal and political landscape in which at least some potential victims of sexual violence had come to feel rightfully connected to the institutions of the federal government, and then became righteously outraged by the endurance of such violence in their communities. OCR's campaign also reflects the unique role of federal administrative agencies in this landscape. Thanks to the power of the purse and the conditions that Congress has attached to funding streams, agencies enjoy a powerful form of jurisdiction over particular spaces and institutions. Attempts to harness this jurisdiction in service of aspirational rights claims should not surprise us; indeed, we should expect such efforts to continue. Building on this insight, the Article concludes with a research agenda for other scholars seeking to understand and evaluate OCR’s handiwork.

免于性暴力的行政权利?从历史和制度的角度看第九条的执行。
近年来最具争议的行政行为之一是美国教育部反对大学校园性侵犯的运动。美国教育部民权办公室(OCR)利用1972年《教育修正案》第九条(要求在接受联邦资金的所有教育项目和活动中不得有性别歧视)赋予的权力,发起了一项强制执行行动,批评者谴责这一行动具有侵略性、操纵性,并侵蚀了个人自由。这篇评论没有从历史的角度来理解为什么这次行政竞选会这样展开。这篇文章提供了重要的背景,提醒读者,在1994年颁布《反妇女暴力法》(violence Against Women Act)后,免受性暴力的自由曾被视为一项全国性的公民权利,但后来在美国最高法院以5比4的裁决中失去了这一地位。OCR最近的活动反映了一种法律和政治格局,在这种格局中,至少有一些潜在的性暴力受害者开始觉得自己与联邦政府的机构有正当的联系,然后理所当然地对社区中这种暴力的持续感到愤怒。OCR的活动也反映了联邦行政机构在这方面的独特作用。由于国库的力量和国会对资金流附加的条件,机构对特定的空间和机构享有强大的管辖权。试图利用这种管辖权来服务于有抱负的权利要求,不应让我们感到意外;事实上,我们应该期待这种努力继续下去。在此基础上,文章总结了一个研究议程,供其他学者寻求理解和评估OCR的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The first issue of what was to become the Duke Law Journal was published in March 1951 as the Duke Bar Journal. Created to provide a medium for student expression, the Duke Bar Journal consisted entirely of student-written and student-edited work until 1953, when it began publishing faculty contributions. To reflect the inclusion of faculty scholarship, the Duke Bar Journal became the Duke Law Journal in 1957. In 1969, the Journal published its inaugural Administrative Law Symposium issue, a tradition that continues today. Volume 1 of the Duke Bar Journal spanned two issues and 259 pages. In 1959, the Journal grew to four issues and 649 pages, growing again in 1970 to six issues and 1263 pages. Today, the Duke Law Journal publishes eight issues per volume. Our staff is committed to the purpose set forth in our constitution: to publish legal writing of superior quality. We seek to publish a collection of outstanding scholarship from established legal writers, up-and-coming authors, and our own student editors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信