Apart from Gillibrand’s curious suggestion that Biden’s political record answers the question of whether he committed personal misconduct, the standards recommended by Biden and his allies are both appropriate and welcome. They recognize both the need to ensure that sexual assault complainants are treated with the respect and sensitivity they deserve and the foundational importance of “due process” in evaluating such a serious allegation.

In fact, this rhetoric closely mirrors that offered by DeVos in 2017, when she rescinded Obama-era guidance and announced plans to develop the new regulations. DeVos stated that her goal was to ensure that “every survivor of sexual misconduct must be taken seriously,” but also that “every student accused of sexual misconduct must know that guilt is not predetermined,” since “due process is the foundation of any system of justice that seeks a fair outcome. Due process either protects everyone, or it protects no one.”

DeVos’ proposed regulations, released in draft form in 2018, provided a sense of her ambitious scope. Colleges would he held to account for sweeping serious allegations under the rug (as her Education Department has recently done in levying heavy fines against Michigan State and USC). But accused students would have a chance to meaningfully defend themselves through a hearing that would include the right for an advocate to cross-examine adverse witnesses and access to the evidence that the college gathered in developing its case.