Summary#

A-5640 would add a requirement to New Jersey’s higher-education law, Title 18A. Its goal is to ensure that incoming undergraduate students at four-year institutions receive training on affirmative consent and specified federal Title IX requirements. The bill has been introduced but is not law; it would first apply in the full academic year after enactment.

• Each four-year institution must provide the training every year to each incoming first-year and transfer student in an undergraduate degree program.
• Training must cover affirmative consent, the institution’s policies on preventing and reporting sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking, and Title IX reporting and investigation procedures.
• The consent information must explain that consent is affirmative, conscious and voluntary; must continue throughout sexual activity; and can be revoked at any time.
• Institutions must regularly assess the training and update it as needed. They may use an interactive online format for students enrolled solely in an online program.
• The bill requires institutions to provide training. It does not say students must complete it or set a penalty for non-completion.

What it means for you#

• Four-year institutions: You would have to provide the training to the covered incoming students each year and regularly assess and update it. The bill does not prescribe a particular assessment method.
• Incoming first-year and transfer students in undergraduate programs: Your institution would have to provide the training. The bill does not set out a process for checking completion.
• Students and institutions: The bill concerns training. It does not itself set out a new student conduct process or change the federal Title IX requirements it refers to.

Money#

No cost estimate is available in the supplied material.

• Institutions would have to provide and regularly assess the training, but the bill gives no staffing or cost estimate.
• The bill does not specify a state appropriation, fee, fine or other funding source.

What is unclear#

• The bill does not define how institutions should measure whether training is effective or how often they must assess it.
• It does not set training length, delivery rules beyond the online option, or a way to verify that students received or completed training.
• It does not specify enforcement, reporting to the state, or consequences if an institution does not provide the training.
• It does not explain how the requirement would apply alongside existing institution training or policies.
• The bill’s online option covers first-year and transfer students enrolled solely in an online program, while the accompanying statement describes the option only for first-year students.

Case for#

• The bill appears intended to give new students information about consent and how to report serious misconduct, including the procedures institutions use under Title IX.
• Requiring training every year for incoming students could make the information available to new cohorts rather than relying on one-time or optional outreach.
• Requiring institutions to assess and update the training could help keep it relevant to students and institutional policies.

Case against#

• Institutions would have to provide and assess training, but the bill does not specify funding or estimate the cost.
• The bill leaves the training’s length, format in most cases, and effectiveness measures open, so the quality and content could vary across institutions.
• It does not set out how compliance will be checked or what happens if an institution fails to provide training.