New Federal Law Creates Anti-Hazing Requirements for Institutions of Higher Education

President Joe Biden signed into law the Stop Campus Hazing Act (the Act) on December 24, 2024. The Act amends the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f), a subsection of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (the Clery Act), and renames the Clery Act officially as the Jeanne Clery Campus Safety Act.

Hazing and Student Organization Defined

The Act defines hazing for purposes of reporting statistics on hazing incidents in an Annual Security Report (ASR) as:

any intentional, knowing, or reckless act committed by a person (whether individually or in concert with other persons) against another person or persons regardless of the willingness of such other person or persons to participate, that –

• is committed in the course of an initiation into, an affiliation with, or the maintenance of membership in, a student organization; and
• causes or creates a risk, above the reasonable risk encountered in the course of participation in the institution of higher education or the organization (such as the physical preparation necessary for participation in an athletic team), of physical or psychological injury … .

The Act sets forth non-exhaustive examples of conduct that causes or creates such a risk, including:

• whipping, beating, striking, electronic shocking, placing of a harmful substance on someone's body, or similar activity;
• causing, coercing, or otherwise inducing sleep deprivation, exposure to the elements, confinement in a small space, extreme calisthenics, or other similar activity;
• causing, coercing, or otherwise inducing another person to consume food, liquid, alcohol, drugs, or other substances;
• causing, coercing, or otherwise inducing another person to perform sexual acts;
• any activity that places another person in reasonable fear of bodily harm through the use of threatening words or conduct;
• any activity against another person that includes a criminal violation of local, State, Tribal, or Federal law; and
• any activity that induces, causes, or requires another person to perform a duty or task that involves a criminal violation of local, State, Tribal, or Federal law.

The Act defines a "student organization" for purposes of reporting statistics as "an organization at an institution of higher education (such as a club, society, association, varsity or junior varsity athletic team, club sports team, fraternity, sorority, band, or student government) in which two or more of the members are students enrolled at the institution of higher education, whether or not the organization is established or recognized by the institution." 

The inclusion of the "an affiliation with" a student organization language in the Act's definition of hazing is broader than that adopted by many states. Most states prohibit sufficiently risky activities related to initiation and maintaining membership in a student organization. The Act's "an affiliation with" language is broader to the extent that it prohibits such activities engaged in as part of an affiliation with a student organization, even where a person's participation in the activities is not conditioned on becoming a member or maintaining continued membership in the student organization. The Act's clarity regarding the scope of what constitutes a student organization and the listing of examples of potential hazing activities further distinguishes this federal law from most state anti-hazing laws.

Requirements for Disclosures in ASRs

The Act expands current ASR reporting requirements and now requires each covered institution to include in its ASR statistics of hazing incidents as defined in the Act (and stated above) "that were reported to campus security authorities or local police agencies" and that are reported to have occurred on campus, in or on non-campus buildings or property, and on certain public property, as defined by the Clery Act (and referred to as Clery geography).

As with other Clery Act statistics, reported hazing incidents in or on Clery geography must be disclosed for the most recent calendar year and during the two preceding calendar years for which data are available. The Act provides that data gathering necessary to comply with this requirement must begin "[n]ot later than January 1 of the first year after the date of enactment of this Act." Because the law was enacted on December 24, 2024, covered institutions must begin to collect data on reported hazing on January 1, 2025.

Requirements for Publishing the Campus Hazing Transparency Report

The Act also calls for a new form of reporting by requiring each covered institution to develop, publish and later update on the institution's website a Campus Hazing Transparency Report (CHTR). There are several differences in what is to be reported in the CHTR and ASR regarding hazing. First, the CHTR must summarize findings concerning any student organizations that are established or recognized by the institution and found to be in violation of the institution's standards of conduct relating to hazing, whereas statistics reporting for ASR purposes must include reports of hazing by student organizations as that term is defined under the Act and, therefore, includes those that are and are not established or recognized by the institution. Also, the scope of information that must be included in the CHTR differs from what must be included in an ASR in that the ASR requires the disclosure of statistics of hazing reported to the institution, whereas the CHTR needs to disclose only a summary of incidents in which a student organization established or recognized by the institution was found to have committed a hazing violation. In addition, the geographic scope of violations that must be summarized in the CHTR is broader than the geographic scope of the statistics reporting section of the Act. Although statistics reported in the ASR should be limited to reported hazing occurring in or on an institution's Clery geography, the Act specifically provides that the Clery Act's definition of "campus" does not apply for CHTR reporting purposes. Therefore, if a student organization established or recognized by the institution is found to have committed a hazing violation, a summary of that finding must be included in the CHTR regardless of where the misconduct occurred.

Under the Act, covered institutions must:

• beginning July 1, 2025, collect information prospectively with respect to hazing incidents concerning student organizations that are established or recognized by the institution found to be in violation of the institution's standards of conduct relating to hazing,
• not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of the Act, make the CHTR publicly available on the institution's public website, and
• not less frequently than two times each year, update the CHTR to include, for the period beginning on the date on which the CHTR was last published and ending on the date on which such update is submitted, each incident involving a student organization for which a finding of responsibility is issued relating to a CHTR defined hazing violation.

These timing requirements are qualified by the Act's provisions that a covered institution is not required to develop a CHTR "until such institution has a finding of a hazing violation" and does not have to update the CHTR for any period in which the institution does not have a finding of a hazing violation.

The summary of information about each finding of responsibility must include the following:

• the name of such student organization,
• a general description of the violation that resulted in a finding of responsibility, including whether the violation involved the abuse or illegal use of alcohol or drugs, the findings of the institution and any sanctions placed on the student organization by the institution, as applicable, and
• the dates on which:
  • the alleged incident was alleged to have occurred,
  • the investigation into the incident was initiated,
  • the investigation ended with a finding that a hazing violation occurred, and
  • the institution provided notice to the student organization that the incident resulted in a hazing violation.

The summaries in the CHTP may contain additional information determined by the institution to be necessary and/or as required by state hazing incident disclosure laws but must "not include any personally identifiable information, including any information that would reveal personally identifiable information, about any individual student" in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. In addition, the CHTP may include a description of the purposes of and differences between statistics on reports of hazing (by any person or entity) in or on Clery geography that are published with other Clery statistics in the institution's ASR, and the summaries of hazing violations by student organizations established or recognized by the institution that are included in the CHTP. Including such a description could help to address any confusion among campus community members and others regarding these distinct types of data. An institution required to publish a CHTP must publish it in a "prominent location" on its website, include a statement notifying the public of the availability of hazing statistics published in its ASR (including a link to the ASR), information about the institution's policies relating to hazing (discussed below) and applicable local, State and Tribal laws on hazing, and the information required in each updated summary of hazing violations, as discussed above, "which shall be maintained for a period of 5 calendar years from the date of publication of such update."

Requirements for Policy and Prevention Program on Hazing

The Act requires each covered institution of higher education to take the following actions by June 30, 2025: 

• publish a statement regarding the institution's current policies relating to hazing (as defined by the institution), how to report incidents of hazing and the process used to investigate hazing incidents, and which provides information on applicable local, State, and Tribal laws on hazing, and
• publish a statement of policy regarding prevention and awareness programs related to hazing (as defined by the institution) that includes a description of research-informed campus-wide prevention programs designed to reach students, staff and faculty, which includes information not only about the institution's policies, reporting and investigation mechanisms, and applicable law, but also primary prevention strategies intended to stop hazing before it occurs (such as skill building for bystander intervention, information about ethical leadership and the promotion of strategies for building group cohesion without hazing).

Though the Act does not dictate the location of these publications, a logical place for publication would be in the institution's ASR. Also, although it is possible that the U.S. Department of Education could permit covered institutions to defer these actions to October 1, 2025, to coincide with the publication of their 2025 ASRs, June 30, 2025, is the current operative date.

Steps to Consider

Covered colleges and universities should consider the following steps:

• Update and enhance as necessary the institution's anti-hazing policy, enforcement mechanisms and hazing education and prevention programs to meet the requirements of the Act, including the Act's definitions of hazing and student organizations.
• Prepare immediately for compliance with ASR statistics gathering and reporting requirements, including by training campus security authorities on their obligations to report information about hazing and establishing effective mechanisms for collection, reporting and compilation of required data and information on hazing activities.
• During the first quarter of 2025, create a shell CHTR website that can be populated with information about hazing violations on or after July 1, 2025, as necessary.
• Assess the need to enhance the institution's hazing prevention efforts campuswide through coordination among departments responsible for student organizations, student conduct and discipline, health and wellness, and campus safety.
• Ensure that student handbooks and other institutional documents related to hazing not only reflect the Act's requirements and definitions, but also provide clear, consistent and coordinated information about the institution's prohibition on hazing and consequences for violations of the institution's anti-hazing policy.

Conclusions and Takeaways

Though 44 states have anti-hazing statutes in place, the passage of this federal legislation illuminates a national concern about serious injury and death related to hazing activities and the need for colleges and universities to formalize hazing-related prevention and data collection efforts. The Act establishes a definition of hazing that is broader than that adopted by many states and seeks to prevent hazing activities through national standards for distribution of data and information related to hazing activities, anti-hazing policies and hazing prevention programs. Significantly, the Act incorporates the Clery Act's substantial enforcement structure, which permits potentially large fines for violations related to policy and statistics reporting requirements, which must be taken seriously.

If you have any questions about the issues summarized above, please reach out to the authors or another member of Holland & Knight's Education Team.

Information contained in this alert is for the general education and knowledge of our readers. It is not designed to be, and should not be used as, the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a legal problem, and it should not be substituted for legal advice, which relies on a specific factual analysis. Moreover, the laws of each jurisdiction are different and are constantly changing. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, we urge you to consult the authors of this publication, your Holland & Knight representative or other competent legal counsel.