Investigative tribunals usually put a formal stamp on cancelations. They should offer a "white listing" as a token of reputational repair to those they clear.
George, I learn so much from you. Yes, why no "white list"? Safe Sport must do better. Is there someone at Safe Sport people can write to? Shame on AP for not updating their report....but I do not have high expectations of the press so I am not surprised.
They have a new CEO who is trying to get the house in order, so maybe that would be a start. But since the Centralized Disciplinary Database is required by law, maybe a "white list" should come into being the same way. Senate Judiciary Committee (chaired by Sen. Grassley) and Committee on Science, Technology, and Commerce (Sen. Cruz) both have a hand in such matters.
Then again, if Congress were to do a significant revision, better option (in my opinion) would be to strike the CDD or remove the Center's immunity from defamation suits.
Yes, you read that right. Another fun fact: the Center has complete immunity from defamation, libel, or slander suits unless you can prove "absolute malice." As far as I can tell, this is the only place in federal law where "absolute malice" is codified in the law, as opposed to being the judicial standard put forth in NY Times v. Sullivan.
George, I learn so much from you. Yes, why no "white list"? Safe Sport must do better. Is there someone at Safe Sport people can write to? Shame on AP for not updating their report....but I do not have high expectations of the press so I am not surprised.
They have a new CEO who is trying to get the house in order, so maybe that would be a start. But since the Centralized Disciplinary Database is required by law, maybe a "white list" should come into being the same way. Senate Judiciary Committee (chaired by Sen. Grassley) and Committee on Science, Technology, and Commerce (Sen. Cruz) both have a hand in such matters.
Then again, if Congress were to do a significant revision, better option (in my opinion) would be to strike the CDD or remove the Center's immunity from defamation suits.
Yes, you read that right. Another fun fact: the Center has complete immunity from defamation, libel, or slander suits unless you can prove "absolute malice." As far as I can tell, this is the only place in federal law where "absolute malice" is codified in the law, as opposed to being the judicial standard put forth in NY Times v. Sullivan.