Ezra Klein ‘Completely Supports’ ‘Terrible’ Yes Means Yes Law

Vox editor-in-chief Ezra Klein waded
into the debate over “Yes Means Yes” affirmative consent laws
Monday, signalling his complete support for California’s SB 967
even though it is “a terrible law,” in Klein’s opinion.

That may seem like contradictory thinking to all of us
non-wonks, but
he does explain it:

It tries to change, through brute legislative force, the most
private and intimate of adult acts. It is
sweeping in its redefinition of acceptable consent; two college
seniors who’ve been in a loving relationship since they met during
the first week of their freshman years, and who, with the ease of
the committed, slip naturally from cuddling to sex, could fail
its test.

The Yes Means Yes law is a necessarily extreme solution to
an extreme problem. Its overreach is precisely its value.

What’s the extreme problem? The supposed epidemic of campus
rape, which Klein claims—repeatedly throughout his article—impacts
1 in 5 college women. Whatever the problems with SB 967, they
should be set aside in service of the goal of minimizing campus
rape, he writes:

The Yes Means Yes laws creates an equilibrium where too much
counts as sexual assault. Bad as it is, that’s a necessary change.
A culture where one-in-five women is assaulted isn’t going to be
dislodged with a gentle nudge. 

Let me get this straight: Any piece of legislation is
worthwhile, no matter how terrible it is, as long as it has the
goal of decreasing rape? I thought Vox was
supposed to be the home of smart, number-crunching journalism,
where experts evaluate the actual effects of policies instead of
merely rubber-stamping their goals? Alas.

Klein should recognize the myriad ways in which he is possibly,
or even likely, wrong. First of all: who is to say that “Yes Means
Yes” will actually decrease instances of sexual assault? The law’s
main function is to push colleges to investigate and adjudicate
sexual assault based on a narrower set of standards and without
recognition of established due process rights. Given the track
record of campus rape trials, there is little reason to think
colleges will excel here. I predict more lawsuits—from both
accusers and the accused—and similar levels of sexual assault. The
heavy hand of government does not automatically and instantly
change culture in the manner that central planners envision.

Furthermore, the 1-in-5 statistic is hotly contested, as Klein
surely knows. (See The Washington Examiner‘s
Ashe Schow and American Enterprise Institute’s Christina
Hoff Sommers for thorough debunking.) That statistic was
produced by a survey of just two colleges; the survey had a high
non-response rate, and
critics contend that victims of sexual assault were more likely
to respond in the first place, skewing the results. The 1-in-5
statistic is also out of whack with national figures: just 1.3 in
1,000 people age 12 and up are victims of sexual assault
nationwide, according to the Bureau of Justice
Statistics.

Again, if doing something—anything!—about campus rape is only
necessary because the rape rate is an absurdly high 1 in 5, then
Klein better be damn sure about that statistic. Plenty of other
experts who have considered the matter at length are not.

Klein’s do something at all costs approach is also an
indictment of the modern left’s warped priorities and callous
disregard for due process. Safeguarding the rights of the accused
was once a cardinal virtue of civil liberalism. But for many
so-called progressives, paranoia about sexual violence trumps all
other considerations. They have much in common with the
tough-on-crime conservatives of past decades, in that respect.

More from Reason on Yes Means Yes here.