Utah State Rep. Angela Romero has introduced a bill that would remove from law the requirement that accusers prove they did not consent to sexual activities.

H.B. 74 seeks to change the definition of consent under Utah’s sexual offense law, removing the requirement that accusers prove they did not consent “when the defendant knows the victim is unconscious, unaware the act is occurring or physically unable to resist.”

At first glance, removing the need for proof may seem fine, as the accuser is supposedly unable to consent. But then how were they made aware of the alleged attack? The accuser's testimony would then be evidence. If an accuser knows or believes they were attacked while unable to consent, they should already have some proof the attack occurred.

Removing the need for any such proof does nothing but open the door to baseless accusations.

If the reason for changing the law is to shift the burden of proof to the accused, this turns the legal system upside down, forcing people to prove their innocence in court. Remember, not everyone accused of a crime is a criminal.

Moreover, the new definition would remove the consent requirement “when the defendant knows” the alleged victim is incapacitated. But how does one prove such knowledge without also proving the accuser didn’t consent? At best, this law does absolutely nothing. At worst, it opens the door for more unchallengeable and false accusations.

Rep. Romero did not respond to a Washington Examiner inquiry.