“Is this really for real?”
That is the text message Lillian Frame sent when she received the amnesty policy announcement on Feb. 3. Frame, a paralegal and survivor advocate, graduated from American University in spring 2023, but remains in contact with student advocates on campus. As a student, she organized protests, drafted demands, attended working group meetings and solicited administrative action to address what she saw as a lack of support for survivors of sexual violence.
For her, the announcement was both shocking and affirming.
“Every single time I get one of those texts that's like, ‘Here's another win that we have,’ it just makes me emotional,” Frame said. “Because I'm like, ‘Oh my God, they are still going and they're still fighting for it.”
On Feb. 3, the University announced the implementation of a Student Amnesty Policy. The policy is one component of the Survivor Bill of Rights, a long-time policy goal of student survivor advocates on campus. While many advocates assert that there is more work to be done to support survivors and engage advocacy organizations, they also said the implementation of the amnesty policy feels like years in the making.
The policy itself protects students from receiving nonacademic disciplinary action for drug or alcohol use when seeking assistance during a medical emergency or while reporting an instance of sexual violence or harassment. The application of the Amnesty policy is up to the discretion of the University, based on several outlined factors. The policy looks to encourage the usage of emergency and reporting services by students without fear of disciplinary recourse, according to the policy statement.
Emily Minster was a student advocate alongside Frame who graduated with a master’s in political communication from AU in spring 2024. She now works as a congressional staffer and is the co-state director of the Every Voice Coalition — a D.C.-based survivor advocacy organization.
Minster points to the importance of an amnesty policy for reporting instances of hazing, as well as sexual violence under Title IX. Title IX is a federal statute that protects students from sex-based discrimination. Students who experience sexual harassment, assault or other types of discrimination, can file a report with the Office of Equity and Title IX.
“An amnesty policy is a good step, but it's not everything,” Minster said. “It's helpful to make sure that people feel comfortable and safe and supported in accessing whatever resources they choose to seek out.”
The first part of the policy outlines the application of amnesty during a medical emergency. Both someone who is evaluated for medical transport, and bystanders who request medical assistance for others, may be eligible for amnesty from drug and alcohol-based Student Conduct violations.
For bystanders to be eligible they must remain with the person in need of medical assistance until it arrives, notify the university of off-campus medical transport and they cannot have supplied the drugs or alcohol that caused a medical emergency. Someone in need of medical assistance is not eligible for amnesty if they have already been evaluated for emergency transport in a prior situation, or if they have a “significant conduct disciplinary history.”
Those who report instances of hazing can be eligible for amnesty if they did not actively participate in hazing activities or supply the “tools” that allowed hazing to take place. Students who report instances of harassment or sexual misconduct via Title IX are eligible for amnesty unless there are allegations that the student who reported the incident is accused of the misconduct in question. Students who provided alcohol or drugs which resulted in violations of consent are also not subject to amnesty.
The granting of amnesty may be predicated on a student attending an “educational intervention meeting” with the Center for Wellbeing and Psychological Services. Failing to attend that meeting can result in the rescinding of amnesty.
Amnesty can not apply to any instance of law-enforcement-initiated activity that results from a student’s criminal actions. Amnesty does not extend to student conduct violations beyond the ones outlined in the policy.
Years in the making
This amnesty policy began formulating with student organizers, including Frame, in 2022. In November of that year, following an instance of sexual abuse in Leonard Hall, a petition circulated which amassed over 1,000 signatures. The petition outlined a series of five demands that student advocates asked of the University to better support students who experienced sexual harassment or violence.
One of those demands called for a Survivor Bill of Rights, modeled off the University of Massachusetts Amherst’s, which includes an amnesty policy.
On Nov. 10, 2022, student organizers staged a walkout and protest on the quad where they called for the aforementioned five demands, including the Survivor Bill of Rights.
Discussion of a Survivor Bill of Rights continued in the University’s Community Working Group on Preventing and Responding to Sexual Harassment and Violence. The working group was announced on Nov. 9, 2022, and convened for the first time on Nov. 30, 2022.
In response to perceived inaction by the community working group, student advocates organized a demonstration in February 2023 where the same demands were called for. In that same month, the Undergraduate Senate’s Special Committee on Combatting Sexual Violence began discussing a resolution on the Survivor Bill of Rights. The resolution passed officially on March 26, 2023.
At the conclusion of the working group in April 2023, participants reviewed the draft recommendations that would be made to the Board of Trustees. The final draft recommendations advocated for the implementation of the Survivor Bill of Rights that passed in the Undergraduate Senate.
At the anniversary protest on Nov. 10, 2023, a new list of 11 demands was issued. The Survivor Bill of Rights remained on that list of demands, alongside specific reference to an amnesty policy.
The other demands included in-person annual sexual violence training for students and staff from experts, the implementation of an annual survey to collect data on sexual violence and resource knowledge, the hiring of a third investigator for the Office of Title IX, a student ambassador program for the office to collect student feedback, the continued update of the Office of Title IX’s website, holding a vote on the final recommendations of the Community Working Group, offering trauma-informed PTSD counseling to survivors and access to affordable contraceptives on campus.
At the beginning of the next academic year, on Jan. 19, 2024, then-President Sylvia Burwell sent out a campus-wide communication that affirmed the University’s commitment to implementing a Survivor Bill of Rights.
“Moving forward, we are focused on our continuing actions such as our participation in the NASPA Culture of Respect program and ongoing work on a Survivor’s Bill of Rights,” the email stated. “These efforts, as well as additional topics and programs that began last year, are a priority across the university and our leadership team and will continue to feature close collaboration with students, faculty, and staff.”
Five months later in April 2024 Julia Comino, then-Student Government senator and current SG Vice President, said she met with several administrators to discuss the feasibility of implementing the Survivor Bill of Rights as University policy.
This was the follow-up discussion to one she had with Raymond Ou, vice president of student affairs, in October 2023. It was in this meeting, according to Comino, that an amnesty policy was highlighted as a particularly implementable part of the SG resolution.
Ou told members of SG at an Executive Board meeting in April 2024 that the policy was in the drafting stages. Then, in November of that year, a draft of the amnesty policy was sent to SG so that they could provide their feedback before the policy was finalized.
The Eagle asked the University to confirm the timeline of these events and the subject matter of these discussions, to which the University offered no additional comments.
The Division of Student Affairs formally announced the policy on Feb. 3, 2025 — over two years since the original demands were circulated.
Advocates react
Comino, who said she was responsible for compiling SG feedback on the policy, was largely satisfied with the outcome.
“I would say that the policy that was announced incorporates a lot of the notes,” Comino said. “Maybe not all of them, but I'm still overall pretty happy with the policy itself.”
Comino and Anika Rao-Mruthyunjaya — the co-president of AU’s chapter of It’s On Us, a national survivor advocacy organization — both emphasized the importance of passing this policy in the wake of a presidential administration that has expressed its intent to roll back Title IX protections.
“I think in a time where there is so much uncertainty, and so much could change, and a program like Title IX seems like something that would be attacked by the [Trump] administration, having school-based policies that do kind of protect survivors and make students rights more accessible to them is very important and it's good to see that it kind of is coming,” Rao-Mruthyunjaya said.
Frame said that it’s important for the University to not back down from its commitments in the face of a less-supportive White House. To her, this policy is reassuring.
“Because we're seeing schools start to delay things because of that, we're seeing schools roll back policies and everything,” Frame said. “Credit to the students for continuing to push it, and I can't believe I'm saying this, a certain amount of credit to the University — a limited amount of credit to the University always — for not throwing it out.”
Rao-Mruthyunjaya said she thought this policy felt like some pay-off from the years of advocacy work by students on campus.
“It’s a long time coming. A lot of hard work has been put into it, so I'm really glad to see that it's being recognized,” Rao-Mruthyunjaya said. “ Should it have come sooner? Absolutely. But is it great that it's happening now? Yes.”
Who gets to be a stakeholder?
However, Rao-Mruthyunjaya noted that, despite her organization’s advocacy for the Survivor Bill of Rights, no one from It’s On Us AU was brought in as a stakeholder consultant to review the draft policy alongside student government.
“As an organization, we’re definitely on a kind of arms-length relationship with the admin, unfortunately,” she said. “They'll collaborate with us when they want to.”
The president of No More AU, Sulakshi Ramamoorthi, said that their organization, which also does survivor advocacy work, was not brought in as a stakeholder either.
Ramamoorthi said she would have liked for the University to ask for student advocate perspectives, but was unsurprised that the policy announcement was her first time hearing of it.
“I feel like the school is not very good at supporting its student advocacy groups,” she said. “They gave No More a really hard time even becoming an official club, so we kind of don't really rely on the school for anything.”
The Eagle reached out to the University to clarify how relevant stakeholders are determined in the policy process and whether other stakeholders, besides SG, were offered the opportunity to review the draft amnesty policy.
In response, The Eagle received a statement from Elizabeth Deal, assistant vice president and deputy chief communications officer.
“This policy was developed through our formal policy development process that incorporates input from students, university stakeholders, and subject matter experts, reflecting our commitment to community-driven solutions,” Deal wrote. “We appreciate the engagement of our community in this effort and look forward to its positive impact in strengthening student well-being.”
The University’s policy development process describes a step in policy finalization where “Stakeholder Groups” are given the opportunity to provide feedback on a given policy. The development process defines Stakeholder Groups as, “specific university committees and representative organizations that are routinely provided with formal notice of Policy changes.”
The Eagle followed up with the University to clarify if authorized student clubs can be considered “representative organizations” as the policy development process defines groups who are eligible to offer policy feedback.
In response, Deal wrote, “The representative student groups are the ones listed in the policy development process.” The policy development process says that stakeholder groups include, “but are not limited to President’s Council, American University Student Government (AUSG), Washington College of Law Student Bar Association (SBA), Graduate Leadership Council (GLC), President’s Council on Diversity & Inclusion (PCDI), Faculty Senate, and Staff Council.”
Work left to be done
Despite the general feeling of support and accomplishment among student survivor advocates on campus, most feel there is still work to be done — particularly with the remainder of the demands made by advocacy organizations.
Tanishka Khanna, vice president of No More AU, said she hopes to see greater strides made in instituting trauma-informed practices in the Office of Title IX.
“In my experience, and also from a lot of people I've talked to, I felt more interrogated when I was doing my Title IX intake meeting than I did when I was talking to [AU Police Department}. That's a problem,” she said.
Minster also highlighted steps that should be taken to prevent sexual violence before it takes place. She said universities should be looking to offer more robust counseling and wellness services and connect survivors with off-campus resources, but also spend more time thinking about preventative solutions.
“Amnesty is great, confidential resource advisors are great, but these all are things that are utilized after violence occurs,” Minster said. “I think we need to think about, in a holistic way, how we can prevent violence before it happens.”
Rao-Mruthyunjaya emphasized the commitment that student advocates still have to support students on campus.
“I would definitely just want survivors to know that, no matter what happens with AU, no matter what happens with the Trump administration, student organizations like It's On Us and the others on campus aren't gonna stop fighting — aren't gonna stop educating and advocating, and making sure that AU does the best with the tools that they have,” she said.
This article was edited by Payton Anderson, Maya Cederlund, Tyler Davis and Abigail Turner. Copy editing done by Luna Jinks, Sabine Kanter-Huchting and Hannah Langenfeld.
