This is an archival copy of the 2006–2017 Assemblies website. This information is no longer updated.
Excerpt from September 17, 2007 Memo on Proposal for Revised Campus Code of Conduct: Major Issues
| Major Issues | Current Code | Proposed Code |
|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction in general | Set no time limit on when accused can raise. | “Any defense of lack of jurisdiction, or other inapplicability of this Code, shall be deemed waived if not raised by the accused promptly at the outset of the hearing before the University Hearing Board or earlier.” (p. 14) |
| Jurisdiction over persons | Covered students, and also faculty and other employees for non-job-related violations. | Slightly refines definition of student. (p. 14) |
| Off-campus jurisdiction | Limited coverage to campus, except for presidential override for “grave misconduct.” (Relied on policies of Article II.A of Title I to mesh Cornell and criminal jurisdiction.) | Adds to the presidential override (p. 7) by providing a more feasible, but still uncommon, jurisdiction over “serious” violations when “the conduct poses a substantial threat to the University’s educational mission or property or to the health or safety of University community members” (p. 20). The idea was to reach the kind of serious violations mentioned on p. 39, but instead of doing the impossible by defining those violations, the new provision on p. 20 relies on the procedural restraint of having the Judicial Administrator obtain the President’s approval of the exercise of jurisdiction. This is a significant change, but the thought is that the Code cannot ignore, say, a student committing rape in Collegetown. |
| Violations | Listed violations. | Rewords the violations, although those listed in 1.l, 3.e, and 3.f are somewhat new. (pp. 21–22) |
| Judicial Administrator powers | Authorised JA to act as prosecutor, subject to strict limits. | Allows the JA and the accused to agree to any authorized penalty or remedy, but provides for oversight of the JA in case of an agreed suspension or dismissal (pp. 25–26); gives the JA modest powers in case of the accused’s failure to respond to notice of charges (pp. 27–28). |
| Procedural protections | Provided right to counsel and right to remain silent, and apparently required proof by a clear and convincing evidence. | Retains and clarifies those protections. (pp. 18, 32–33) |
CJC Shortcuts
Contact CJC
109 Day Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
ph. (607) 255—3715