HANOVER — U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a Dartmouth College graduate who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, has joined a growing group of alumni, students and faculty members who are urging the college to rescind its opposition to the use of pseudonyms by three women in a class-action lawsuit against the college.
Though the college and the plaintiffs are now pursuing mediation to settle the $70 million suit that was first filed in November and that alleges that college administrators turned a blind eye to sexual misconduct by three professors in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, public calls continue for the college to remove its opposition to the use of Jane Doe, Jane Doe 2 and Jane Doe 3 for three of the nine students and researchers who are plaintiffs in the case.
“Senator Gillibrand believes this is just plain wrong and could have a chilling effect on survivors coming forward,” her New Hampshire spokeswoman Sarah Guggenheimer said in an emailed statement last week. “Dartmouth should do the right thing and change course.”
Gillibrand, who graduated from Dartmouth in 1988, joins Dartmouth Community Against Gender Harassment & Sexual Violence, the Student and Presidential Council on Sexual Assault and the Dartmouth chapter of the American Association of University Professors in calling for the college to “recast its approach to the lawsuit.”
In a petition that began circulating last week, and is so far signed by about 400 people including Dartmouth alumnae U.S. Rep. Annie Kuster, D-N.H., and state Sen. Martha Hennessy, D-Hanover, the three groups which represent alumni, students and faculty members said that “In many cases, anonymity may often be the best, if not the only, option for survivors.”
The college in its May filing contesting the use of pseudonyms contends that its ability to defend itself against the plaintiffs’ charges is compromised by the use of pseudonyms and that this use is particularly unfair “given Plaintiffs’ use of publicity as a sword.”
Though the college knows the identities of the Jane Does participating in the suit, it cannot reveal their identities publicly in the course of its preparation for trial. It can, however, depose them as it would the named plaintiffs. The college contends that it will be hamstrung in determining whether these women are representatives of the class they purport to represent.
“Indeed, the very public nature of what a class representative is supposed to do — represent and stand in the place of other plaintiffs — is at odds with the request to remain anonymous,” Dartmouth said in its filing.
In addition to Dartmouth’s concerns about the fairness of the use of pseudonyms, free press advocates also question the practice as a threat to transparency.
“The benefits of an open and transparent court system and the press’s ability to report on legal proceedings — subjecting all players to extensive scrutiny, guarding against a miscarriage of justice, giving assurance that proceedings are fair, discouraging perjury and decisions based on bias, providing context to the legal proceedings — are all potentially undermined when the public and the press cannot tell who has invoked the power of public courts to resolve disputes,” Tom Isler, a legal fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said in a 2015 white paper on the subject.
Those asking the college to change its stance, however, say that anonymity in cases of sexual misconduct helps to protect survivors.
“Survivors who seek justice frequently suffer lasting repercussion, including bias and backlash in the workplace, and even further violence in their personal lives,” the alumni, student and faculty groups wrote in their petition, which they expect to deliver to Dartmouth President Phil Hanlon and the board of trustees later this week, according to Diana Whitney, a 1995 Dartmouth graduate and a member of the Dartmouth Community Against Gender Harassment & Sexual Violence coalition.
The groups assert that asking victims to identify themselves is a form of intimidation.
“It sends a clear message to other Dartmouth victims that they risk aggressive treatment if they come forward,” the groups said in their petition.
Additionally, the groups say that Dartmouth’s opposition to the plaintiffs’ use of anonymity undermines the college’s efforts to create a more inclusive and welcoming community.
“If we are to take seriously the stated intentions of the current administration to pursue meaningful cultural and institutional reform, as well as the mission of the College’s ‘Call to Lead,’ ($3 billion capital campaign) then Dartmouth must radically recast its approach to the lawsuit,” the groups wrote.
An update on the status of the mediation effort is due in court by the end of July.
Nora Doyle-Burr can be reached at ndoyleburr@vnews.com or 603-727-3213.
Clarification
Dartmouth College says it does not oppose plaintiffs using pseudonyms if they are asserting individual claims of sexual misconduct on campus, saying it is consistent with the effort to encourage reporting, including anonymously, of such conduct so that Dartmouth can address it. This story about criticism of Dartmouth’s opposition to pseudonyms in a class-action lawsuit against the college was unclear on that point.
