The motivation for this law is noble – who doesn’t want college kids to consent before sex?
If SB-967 passes, then California colleges will be required to adopt policies that require “an affirmative, unambiguous and conscious decision” by each participant. If one of them is silent or expresses no resistance, that’s not enough.
If the accused party wants to claim that there was consent, it won’t fly if the other party was asleep, unconscious, drunk, or on drugs.
“No means no” makes plenty of sense. Some of the bill makes plenty of sense too. But, there is some question as to whether we want to have college administrators acting as rape-investigators. On one hand, this is Law Enforcement’s job. On the other, I’m not exactly sure I’d be confident in the cops doing the best job.
I’d be a lot more comfortable with something like this if it had provisions to protect the falsely accused — and yes, that’s a thing.
