Search for a command to run...
Title IX requires educational institutions to address sexual misconduct but provides no clear standard for defining consent. In the absence of federal guidance, colleges and universities operate in a regulatory vacuum, producing inconsistent definitions, legal uncertainty, and contested understandings of what consent requires. Without a structured framework, institutions struggle to balance survivor protection, due process, and practical implementation. This Article introduces a principles-based framework that supports clearer, more coherent consent policies. It identifies three interdependent elements of valid sexual consent: (1) Respect for Choices and Autonomy, which requires voluntary agreement free from coercion or pressure; (2) Informed Expectations and Transparency, which addresses the role of material disclosures in shaping sexual decisions; and (3) Capacity for Meaningful Participation, which focuses on the ability to understand, evaluate, and communicate consent, especially in contexts involving intoxication or cognitive impairment. Rather than prescribing uniform policies, this framework provides legal academics and college administrators with an analytical tool for evaluating existing definitions, identifying normative gaps, and building more coherent standards that reflect both ethical commitments and institutional realities. In addition to articulating the framework, this Article offers a method for evaluating existing policies and testing the consequences of definitional variation. Through comparative policy analysis, hypothetical scenario application, and a three-part typology—Expansive, Intermediate, and Minimalist—this Article demonstrates how different evidentiary thresholds and normative priorities shape institutional outcomes. It shows how the principles frequently intersect and sometimes conflict, requiring adjudicators and policymakers to make value-based tradeoffs in design and implementation. By combining normative clarity with institutional pragmatism, this Article offers legal academics and college policymakers a scalable model for building consent standards that reflect both ethical commitments and regulatory realities. The framework is not prescriptive, but adaptable—designed to help institutions clarify their definitions, train adjudicators, and better align policy with the lived complexity of campus sexual encounters.