Two weeks ago, a federal judge in Vermont blocked the expulsion of a Middlebury College student who had been accused of sexual misconduct and, without a hearing, was barred from enrolling for the fall semester.

"This case presents a unique situation where the plaintiff was exonerated of the charge of sexual assault by one U.S. institution following an investigation and hearing, allowed to continue his studies the next term, and subsequently determined by (Middlebury) following a second investigation of the same allegation to have committed sexual assault, after which he was expelled," wrote U.S. Judge J. Garvan Murtha.

The student, identified only as John Doe, was enrolled in a study-abroad program run by The School for International Training in November 2014 when he was accused by a non-Middlebury student of misconduct.

The school was informed of the allegations and accepted the result of the first inquiry, at least until it learned that the accuser intended to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education.

Then Middlebury launched a re-investigation and dropped the hammer on Doe.

Murtha reinstated Doe after concluding that he was "likely" to prevail in his lawsuit against Middlebury and faced "irreparable harm" — the loss of a high-paying job contingent on graduating — if the expulsion stood.

Middlebury College isn't alone in making rash decisions when it comes to accusations of sexual misconduct on college campuses.

During a congressional hearing earlier this month, U.S. Rep. Jared Polis, whose district includes the University of Colorado in Boulder, suggested that it's so important to protect students from sexual assault that institutions shouldn't take any chances when it comes to proving misconduct.

"It certainly seems reasonable that a school for its own purposes might want to use a preponderance of evidence standard, or even a lower standard. Perhaps a likelihood standard. ... If I was running a (college), I might say: Well, even if there is only a 20 or 30 percent chance that it happened, I would want to remove this individual," Polis said.

He argued that expelling students on the basis of accusations really didn't amount to much in terms on infringing on individual liberties.

"If there are 10 people who have been accused ... it seems better to get rid of all 10 people. We're not talking about depriving them of life or liberty, we're talking about them being transferred to another university, for crying out loud," he said.

After a Boulder newspaper accused Polis of embracing the "spectacularly bad" idea that accusation requires punishment, the legislator claimed that he "misspoke."

But he didn't misspeak. He echoed what has become an increasingly defensive position embraced by college administrators facing pressure from federal education bureaucrats and politicians over what is commonly described as a "rape culture" peculiar to college campuses.

Just last week, Syracuse University suspended its "kiss cam" at the Carrier Dome after a letter writer claimed that it encourages sexual assault.

A spokeswoman for the athletic department said the institution will engage in a sober reflection on the potential dangerousness of the "kiss cam" before making a final decision about any future use.

The ongoing debate over sexual assault on campus and what to do about it reveals a shadow system of justice overseen by individuals unschooled, even indifferent, to due process issues that go along with serious accusations of wrongdoing.

Sexual assault is a serious criminal offense in the criminal justice system that carries with it draconian penalties for individuals who are found guilty.

But, as is the case in all criminal cases, the accused is entitled to legal representation and the opportunity to cross-examine their accuser. The accused doesn't have to prove anything; the prosecution has to prove the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the shadow system, the rules are more ambiguous. At Middlebury, Doe got the boot, not a hearing, before the court intervened.

Further, campus cases often are much more confusing, sometimes involving alcohol-fueled adventures between individuals who know each other and whose actions are subject to wide interpretation.

It can be sexual misconduct allegations resulting from rape or regret over a one-night stand.

But cases like that do find their way into the court system, and it's instructive to see what due process looks like in a court of law, where proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required, as compared to campus proceedings, where the standard of proof can be far less.

A three-judge appellate panel, two of whom were women, recently overturned the criminal sexual assault conviction and eight-year prison sentence of Luis Roldan.

He was convicted of having sex with a young girl after an evening of drinking on the grounds that she was too intoxicated to give knowing consent.

The trial judge said the girl — identified only a J.T. — was "in a blackout state and he knew she was impaired."

The appellate court reversed the conviction on the grounds that the state hadn't proved that Roldan knew she was too impaired to give her consent and that there was plenty of evidence to suggest to Roldan that she wasn't.

The young woman had consumed a large amount of vodka and was under the influence. Plus, there is little dispute that when morning arrived, she had no memory of the previous evening's activities.

The question is not what her condition was, but what Roldan knew about her condition before they had sex.

Witnesses testified the woman seemed "fine" and had no trouble walking or talking.

Roldan "knew J.T. had consumed alcohol, but no evidence supports the conclusion that he knew that rather than simply having relaxed inhibitions, she was completely unable to consent. Thus, without more, this is insufficient to meet the state's burden of showing beyond a reasonable doubt that (Roldan) knew J.T. was incapable of giving knowing consent," Justice Joy Cunningham wrote in a 12-page opinion.

The judicial system requires proof. The shadow college system embraces mere accusation. Given that lowered standard and the politicized nature of the so-called rape culture on campus, rhetorical fireworks and litigation will continue to rise.

Jim Dey, a member of The News-Gazette staff, can be reached by email at jdey@news-gazette.com or at 217-351-5369.