In October, a group of students began circulating a petition about Title IX policies on Carleton’s campus. Student distrust in the Title IX Office, stemming from the fact that many students have heard far more negative stories about their peers’ experiences with Title IX than positive ones, directly led to the petition. These problems were catalyzed by many stories of sexual misconduct by Resident Assistants (RAs) and New Student Week Leaders during New Student Week 2025, which made it clear that Carleton needs to initiate meaningful, systematic changes to the way that they respond to cases of sexual misconduct on campus.
Title IX is the federal law that protects gender equality in educational institutions. Part of the law lays the framework for how schools should handle sexual misconduct on their campuses. On a national level, Title IX has always been flawed — it has only been worsened and weakened by the Trump administration. One critical flaw is that it can often protect perpetrators, further harming victims. However, the law also contains significant ambiguity, allowing schools to shape their own guidelines. It is within these bounds that the Carleton administration has been choosing not to protect its students — especially its youngest and most vulnerable. This is why our group, Carls for Title IX Reform, is demanding change.
The first of the petition’s demands is for a policy change that would ensure that students found responsible for violating Carleton’s policy against sexual misconduct will not be allowed to work as Peer Leaders. A Carletonian article published in November of 2024 noted that, under the current guidelines, students known to have violated the policy against sexual misconduct have been hired as Peer Leaders. Despite the attention that this article received on campus, the experiences of many students during the most recent New Student Week show that there has been no meaningful change in sexual misconduct prevention on campus.
It is well within Carleton’s power to prevent students who have been found responsible for sexual misconduct in a formal Title IX complaint process from becoming Peer Leaders. In meetings with Carls for Title IX Reform, Dean of Students Carolyn Livingston said that Carleton does conduct checks before hiring Peer Leaders, and the new Title IX Coordinator, Nathan Riel-Elness, has indicated a desire to place a disclaimer about conduct checks on all peer leader job applications. Furthermore, the Community Board on Sexual Misconduct (CBSM) may impose sanctions following a Title IX hearing. According to the student handbook, these sanctions can include “restrictions on participation in campus activities,” “change in work schedule or location” or “termination of employment.” Other institutions have stricter hiring policies in place, demonstrating that these policies are legally viable grounds for ensuring that students found guilty in a formal Title IX process do not get hired into positions of power.
Instead, the Title IX Office insists on handling sanctions, including those that would bar a student from being a Peer Leader, on a “case-by-case basis.” While this sounds fine in theory, it is problematic in practice. At Carleton, the CBSM has no guidelines for sanctions for specific violations of the sexual misconduct policy. The result is a highly subjective system that leads to perpetrators falling through the cracks, receiving lighter sanctions than another student would for the same infraction, just because their case was heard under different members of the CBSM. This is exacerbated by a lack of accountability. Whereas at peer institutions, like Dickinson College, annual Title IX reports include anonymized yet specific information about which violations led to which sanctions, for most students at Carleton, the sanctioning system remains completely opaque.
The insistence on a “case-by-case basis” also raises serious questions when it comes to Peer Leaders. Is there any case where someone who was found responsible for sexual misconduct should be put in such a position of power? First-year students are taught to trust, look up to and confide in Peer Leaders. These are students who facilitate presentations on consent, boundary setting and healthy relationships. RAs, in particular, are mandated reporters and have access to student housing information and to students’ room keys. Students could be working any other job on campus — the idea that Carleton should be putting known abusers in a position of power over vulnerable students in any case is indefensible.
This policy creates an unsafe environment for students and fails survivors. No student who chooses to take their complaint through the formal Title XI process makes that decision lightly. It involves reliving their trauma in front of an audience and directly facing their abuser. Even worse, one can go through this entire process, have their abuser be found responsible and still watch that abuser be hired as a Peer Leader. Many survivors face further trauma from not being believed and having their experiences dismissed. Even if they are believed, Carleton’s administration’s actions show that it just doesn’t care.
The widespread distrust of the Title IX Office at Carleton is not the fault of any one person. The failure to protect victims is systemic. Victims should not be dependent on a Title IX system that does not have their backs. The Carleton Administration, the Title IX Office and the Peer Leader Committee must implement concrete policy changes to ensure accountability and to protect students.