A law professor from the University of Miami is concerned about the increase of “yes-means-yes” sexual assault laws and argues they’re shifting the burden of proof in a detrimental way.

Ashe Schow writes for the Washington Examiner:

Miami law professor criticizes burden of proof shifting

A University of Miami Law professor is criticizing “yes-means-yes” sexual consent laws and the burden of proof shifting that comes along with them.

Professor Tamara Rice Lave published a blog on PrawfsBlawg, a website run by a group of law professors from around the country.

“When I was a public defender, I used to always remind jurors that because the BOP was on the prosecutor, I could literally say nothing, and still, if the D.A. didn’t prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, they would have to acquit,” Rice Lave wrote. “But with affirmative consent, the accused must put on evidence. If the university proves by a preponderance of the evidence that a sex act happened, the student has violated the university code of conduct unless he can convince the fact finder that the complainant consented.” (Emphasis original.)

Rice Lave went on to praise Judge Carol L. McCoy of Tennessee for her recent ruling that the University of Tennessee could not force a student to prove a crime didn’t occur. In that case, McCoy ruled that “absent the tape recording of a verbal consent or other independent means to demonstrate that consent was given, the ability of an accused to prove the complaining party’s consent strains credulity and is illusory.”