果冻传媒app官方

Table of Contents

Court Rejects University鈥檚 Use of FERPA to Withhold Police Records

A Connecticut state court judge rebuffed Central Connecticut State University鈥檚 (CCSU鈥檚) attempt to use the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) to deny an accused student access to evidence against him. is a shot across the bow for schools considering invoking FERPA to withhold police records during disciplinary proceedings even though FERPA explicitly excludes law enforcement records from being withheld.

Austin Haughwout, a former CCSU student, sued after he was expelled for making a 鈥渢rue threat,鈥 a form of unprotected speech outside the bounds of the First Amendment. According to a campus police report, Haughwout allegedly said to a student, 鈥淚 should just shoot up this school,鈥 and told another student that he was Haughwout鈥檚 鈥渘umber one target.鈥 Witnesses also stated that Haughwout constantly talked about guns and ammunition and 鈥済reet[ed] everyone by pointing at them with his hand in the shape of a gun.鈥

However, none of these witnesses appeared at Haughwout鈥檚 disciplinary hearing, where he denied making these statements. The evidence presented against him at the hearing consisted almost entirely of the campus police report containing this second-hand information. CCSU withheld this crucial document from Haughwout until the hearing, citing FERPA.

The university鈥檚 distorted interpretation of FERPA is noteworthy because it perversely construed the statute, , to require the denial of one of the most fundamental due process rights of the accused鈥攖he right to present a defense. No witnesses appeared at Haughtwout鈥檚 hearing鈥攐nly a single investigator who presented the police report to the disciplinary panel. When Haughwout asked to see the report, the university refused to give him the names of the students who made the statements against him until midway through the hearing. Unsurprisingly, he was found responsible and expelled.

This is that FERPA has been invoked by schools to conceal records FERPA explicitly exempts from its coverage. requires schools receiving federal funds to keep student 鈥渆ducation records鈥 private, but it explicitly excludes records generated by campus law enforcement. Yet this has not prevented in refusing to disclose crime statistics, such as the and other acts of violence on campus, despite being required to do so under .

Unfortunately for Haughwout, despite prevailing on the FERPA issue, the court ultimately found that CCSU did not deprive him of due process in its decision to expel him. However, the court did not spare CCSU from its ire:

While this court believes that Central鈥檚 procedures satisfied the requirements of due process, it also believes that Central could have done better and should choose to do better in the future.

Why, for example, could Mr. Haughwout not have been provided with at least the redacted campus police reports and the arrest warrant application at the same time as [Director of Central鈥檚 Office of Student Conduct] Mr. [Christopher] Dukes sent him the written notice, without the need for him to file a Freedom of Information request?

The Student Press Law Center (SPLC) the court鈥檚 conclusion that CCSU used adequate disciplinary procedures, questioning how Haughwout鈥檚 expulsion could stand when based 鈥渟olely on . . . double- and even triple-hearsay testimony of CCSU鈥檚 director of student conduct, serving as both investigator and accuser, which would be inadmissible in a court of law.鈥 These flaws were particularly egregious, the SPLC said, for hearings involving allegations of true threats because 鈥渢he decisive issue is whether listeners genuinely understood what they heard as threatening.鈥 Accordingly, 鈥渇irst-hand testimony of those listeners鈥攁nd the ability to cross-examine them鈥攕eem essential to the fundamentally fair hearing that due process requires.鈥

While the ratification of CCSU鈥檚 scarce due process protections is troubling, we are pleased the court interpreted FERPA correctly. We at FIREhope the decision discourages schools from using FERPA to restrict a student鈥檚 right to conduct a meaningful defense when facing university discipline.

Recent Articles

FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Share