“Yes Means Yes” law defines sexual consent

California’s newly passed “Affirmative Consent” Sexual Assault Bill,  which requires “affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity,” has sparked debate on how sexual violence investigations on college campuses should be conducted.

“Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent,” the law, commonly referred to as the “Yes Means Yes” bill, states. “Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and can be revoked at any time.”

California is now the first state to have a clear definition of sexual consent. By requiring affirmative consent in every stage of a sexual encounter between partners, the law aims to eliminate ambiguity around consent and reduces the burden on sexual assault survivors. It also states that consent can never be given by someone who is asleep, unconscious or under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

Under this bill, all California schools receiving any form of funding from the state must abide by this definition of consent when investigating sexual assault cases.

Similar to the “Yes Means Yes” law, the University’s Sexual Violence Policy also requires that affirmative consent must be given to engage in sexual activity.

“Sexual activity of any kind requires consent, which is defined as clear and voluntary agreement between participants to engage in the specific act, which cannot be inferred from the absence of a ‘no,’” the policy states.

Nationwide, the new law has received strong support from groups that advocate for sexual assault survivors in addition to feminist organizations.

However, critics of the bill have responded by saying the legalization of sexual consent is impractical.

Political Science Professor Emeritus Joel Grossman said that he thinks there will be issues with applying affirmative consent in investigations, because it may infringe upon an individual’s constitutional rights. Grossman pointed out that suspects are still considered innocent until proven guilty.

“The problem still remains... of the burden of proof on the prosecution,” Grossman said. “Of course it’ll be popular for elections, but whether the law will be effective — that’s another question.”

Hopkins students also shared mixed perspectives on the new law. Some students said they felt that affirmative consent policies should be practiced on more college campuses across the country.

“The campaign is definitely a step in the right direction because it’s trying to de-blur the lines in terms of legal proceedings that go on,” sophomore Sara Shah said. “So often, issues of sexual assault come down to his word against hers. Hopefully, with this law, it will clear up some of the stigma surrounding the legal proceedings.”

Other students said that although the purpose of the law can be considered valid, the actual implementation of the law, as can be read in the “Yes Means Yes” bill, will likely prove to be impractical.

“It’s a good idea but a little too difficult to put into practice and actually prove,” sophomore Michael Guo said. “I think the law is somewhat unnecessary in that people should just be responsible about sexual consent in general. There should just be a general social [expectation] for people to continually ask for consent along the way.”

In Maryland, the current laws for sexual assault have less stringent definitions, especially those that relate to college campuses.

The Maryland law states that there are four degrees of sexual offense: forceful or forced sexual encounters; engaging in a sexual act with a mentally defective, physically helpless or underage individual; sexual acts under the threat of dangerous weapons or serious infliction of harm; and sexual acts committed by an individual in a position of authority with regard to the minor. However, none of these clauses clearly define sexual consent.