UA Codes and Judicial Committee

Committee Meeting, 2/14/97

Present: Kathleen E. Rourke, staff, chair, and acting secretary; Michael N. Kazarinoff, faculty; Barbara Krause, judicial administrator, ex-officio; Gregory W. Heibel, graduate student; Ellis Loew, faculty; John Sherry, university assembly liaison

Pepper spray: Barbara Krause is checking with the University Assembly about setting up an open forum to discuss the legalities involved in carrying and using pepper spray on campus. The forum is tentatively planned to include a member of the campus police, health services, women#s group (maybe CARE), and the Judicial Administrator. Krause will then send a letter to the Cornell Daily Sun explaining the pepper spray on campus legalities and include the time and place of the Forum.

At this time the CJC does not feel it is necessary to change the code. The committee feels it is sufficient to make sure the community understands the situation on campus. The open forum may present enough concerns for us to reconsider this decision. Krause hopes that all members of the CJC will be present at the open forum and participate in the discussion.

University Assembly: At the last meeting of the UA none of our suggestions (re:

1. alternate# designation in our membership list, changes to Title IV, vii, D3a) were

discussed or acted upon. John Sherry will try and make sure they are acted upon during the Feb. meeting of the UA.

New business: The code defines students, for jurisdictional purposes, as students who are

1. currently registered.# Krause is concerned that this is too narrow. She cites some cases

in her memo of Nov. 5 where disciplinary matters occurred which were not in her jurisdiction. All such cases not under her jurisdiction had to be referred to the general police and civil/penal codes. Since her memo was written, another situation has developed involving harassment by a non-registered student who remains affiliated with the University. Krause feels the code needs to be revised so Cornell has jurisdiction over such matters and can avoid the need for civil and penal action. In her memo she suggests a sentence adapted from a model code of conduct.

In the ensuring discussion the committee raised some interesting points. One question regarded the J.A.#s authority over non-registered students. What, in reality, could she do to such a person? Krause replied that as long as the student(s) had a continuing relationship with Cornell, she could impose any of the remedies she could for registered students, such as restitution, community service, vacating the premises, etc. Krause clarified that she did not mean to suggest that the revision should somehow extend jurisdiction to those with no Cornell affiliation (such as students from other institutions who might be living and/or working in Ithaca for the summer).

The discussion then centered on the phrase #continuing relationship with Cornell.# One question that was raised was, would the vagueness of this term be applied to people like alumni during reunion or others only slightly connected with Cornell? Committee members also wondered about the JA being able to call people back to campus from summer vacation.

The committee has asked Krause to revise the suggested language to address our concerns as mentioned above. She will bring revised language to our next meeting.Reorganized Code: Rourke indicated that she hopes the committee will be able to review the working draft of a reorganized code that she and Krause worked on over the summer. She would like the CJC to make a recommendation on the suggested reorganization before the last UA meeting in May.

Next Meeting: The next meeting of the CJC is presently scheduled for Friday, March 7, at 11:00 in Day Hall 160A. It is important that committee members attend the meeting so a quorum is present for voting. Please call or E-mail Rourke (5–7477 or KER8@cornell.edu) if you cannot attend the March meeting.

Respectfully submitted, Kathleen E. Rourke