Backstory: Duke expels senior for drunken he-said she-said rape. Senior sues Duke. During cross-examination, this gem pops out:
The difficulty of defining incapacitation and consent was underscored last week when Dean Wasilolek took the stand Rachel B. Hitch, a Raleigh attorney representing McLeod, asked Wasiolek what would happen if two students got drunk to the point of incapacity, and then had sex.
"They have raped each other and are subject to explusion?" Hitch asked.
"Assuming it is a male and female, it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent before proceeding with sex," said Wasiolek.
http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/a-duke-...ue=4171222
There it is. College men, you are second-class citizens, less entitled to the protections and presumptions of law than your female counterparts. When you get drunk and have sex, they have committed no malfeasance and you are unable to depend on the law to protect your bodily integrity. When they get drunk and have sex, you have invaded theirs.
But is it a Constitutional violation? On its face, it would seem so - equal protection is a tenet of the 14th Amendment. However, SCOTUS precedent suggests otherwise.
Read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_M._...ma_County. Should Michael M still hold? What glaring difference now exists?
The difficulty of defining incapacitation and consent was underscored last week when Dean Wasilolek took the stand Rachel B. Hitch, a Raleigh attorney representing McLeod, asked Wasiolek what would happen if two students got drunk to the point of incapacity, and then had sex.
"They have raped each other and are subject to explusion?" Hitch asked.
"Assuming it is a male and female, it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent before proceeding with sex," said Wasiolek.
http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/a-duke-...ue=4171222
There it is. College men, you are second-class citizens, less entitled to the protections and presumptions of law than your female counterparts. When you get drunk and have sex, they have committed no malfeasance and you are unable to depend on the law to protect your bodily integrity. When they get drunk and have sex, you have invaded theirs.
But is it a Constitutional violation? On its face, it would seem so - equal protection is a tenet of the 14th Amendment. However, SCOTUS precedent suggests otherwise.
Read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_M._...ma_County. Should Michael M still hold? What glaring difference now exists?