A lawsuit involving Cornell University has renewed scrutiny of how colleges and universities handle reports of sexual assault, particularly when outside law enforcement agencies decline to pursue criminal charges. The case raises a central question: can legal action compel institutions to adopt changes that make students safer? To explore that question, NPR's All Things Considered spoke with Baine Kerr, a retired Title IX attorney who built a national reputation litigating precedent-setting civil rights and campus sexual assault cases.
Kerr's answer rests on a key legal principle embedded in Title IX, the federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in education. Under that framework, a university's obligation is triggered the moment it receives notice of an alleged assault. Once notice exists, the institution must take action — and that action begins with an investigation conducted in coordination with law enforcement. The responsibility is not discretionary, and it does not evaporate simply because prosecutors or police decide not to intervene.
That point is especially significant in cases where criminal authorities choose not to file charges, which is common in sexual assault cases that may lack forensic evidence or fall outside statutes of limitation. According to Kerr, even when outside police authorities or prosecutors take no action, the university's own obligations remain fully intact. The institution cannot treat a prosecutor's inaction as permission to stand down.
From there, Kerr outlined what the process requires. Hearings must be held, and disciplinary measures must be imposed on those determined through that hearing process to have committed sexual wrongs. This creates a parallel system of accountability that operates independently of the criminal justice system — a system universities are required to maintain regardless of what happens in court.
Kerr described these requirements as "very comprehensive," and he noted that universities are acutely aware of them. Administrators understand the scope of their duties under Title IX, even if compliance in practice remains uneven. The rules cover not only how reports are investigated and adjudicated but also how institutions prepare students before problems arise.
One of the most concrete mandates Kerr pointed to is prevention education. Title IX requires colleges and universities to provide an orientation for incoming freshmen about campus sexual assault. Every single incoming student is expected to attend a session designed to train them in sexual assault prevention. This requirement reflects the law's dual focus: responding to misconduct after it occurs and attempting to stop it before it happens.
Yet the persistence of campus sexual assault raises an obvious question, which NPR's Elissa Nadworny put directly to Kerr: why hasn't all of this been enough to change campus culture? Why does the problem remain so widespread? Kerr's response acknowledged the difficulty of the challenge. He described the effort as "a constant battle," shaped by the built-in churn of university life.
That churn is a structural reality. Students leave campus after four years or fewer, and new students arrive each year. This constant turnover means institutional knowledge and cultural norms must be rebuilt continually. Prevention training reaches one cohort, but a new cohort arrives the following fall, often with little exposure to prior education efforts. The cycle repeats, making sustained culture change an ongoing project rather than a one-time fix.
The Cornell lawsuit fits into this broader landscape of litigation that has sought to hold institutions accountable for how they respond — or fail to respond — to reports of sexual violence. Such cases can force universities to examine their procedures, revise policies, and strengthen the systems meant to protect students. Whether a lawsuit can generate lasting cultural change is a different question from whether it can compel procedural reform.
Legal pressure has historically played a role in shaping how campuses handle these cases. Litigation brought by survivors and their advocates has helped establish expectations around investigation, hearings, and disciplinary outcomes. Precedent-setting cases have clarified that universities carry duties that exist alongside — not instead of — criminal proceedings. Kerr's career has been defined in part by those battles.
Still, the gap between legal requirements and lived experience on campus remains a persistent concern. Requirements for training, investigation, and hearings exist on paper. Whether they function effectively depends on institutional commitment, resources, and the willingness of students to report. Reporting itself can be difficult, given the social and emotional stakes involved.
For students, the practical implications are significant. A survivor who reports an assault to a university can expect an investigation that proceeds in coordination with law enforcement, but not contingent on it. Even if police or prosecutors decline to act, the school's process should continue. Hearings should follow, and discipline should be imposed when misconduct is found.
The Cornell case, and the conversation surrounding it, underscores a tension that universities continue to navigate: the obligation to act is clear, the mechanisms are established, and the training is mandated, yet the problem of campus sexual assault persists. Kerr's assessment suggests there is no single solution — only sustained effort against a recurring challenge, renewed with every incoming class.
As the lawsuit proceeds, its outcome could shape what Cornell and other institutions do next. Legal challenges can prompt policy revisions and procedural changes. But as Kerr's comments indicate, the deeper goal — making students safer — depends on more than rules. It requires consistent enforcement, meaningful prevention, and a campus culture that treats accountability as an ongoing responsibility rather than a compliance exercise.
(0)