As long as it is a real court and not those kangaroo court.
And that's the crux of the issue. What the women's groups are looking for here is to use the school's investigatory system against the accused so that there's an official "found to have committed the act" entry into the record and the accused can be expelled and have a permanent black mark. They're not interested in due process, as that would mean some/most of the people accused would be found "not guilty" so to speak.
The problem with sexual assault investigation is that it often amounts to he said/she said. Absent violence, there's no physical evidence to differentiate someone who was a victim from someone who simply had morning after regrets. In those cases, American legal tradition says the benefit of the doubt should go to the accused. By trying to get a preponderance of the evidence standard, they're trying to ensnare people by getting the institution to say "well he probably did it so I'll just expel him to be safe".
And that's the crux of the issue. What the women's groups are looking for here is to use the school's investigatory system against the accused so that there's an official "found to have committed the act" entry into the record and the accused can be expelled and have a permanent black mark. They're not interested in due process, as that would mean some/most of the people accused would be found "not guilty" so to speak.
The problem with sexual assault investigation is that it often amounts to he said/she said. Absent violence, there's no physical evidence to differentiate someone who was a victim from someone who simply had morning after regrets. In those cases, American legal tradition says the benefit of the doubt should go to the accused. By trying to get a preponderance of the evidence standard, they're trying to ensnare people by getting the institution to say "well he probably did it so I'll just expel him to be safe".