UA Codes and Judicial Committee

« Jurisdiction over Persons | 2007Fall | Violations »

This page contains comments posted by members of the Cornell community pertaining to 2007 Fall Off Campus Jurisdiction in the current and proposed Campus Code and judicial system. Before posting to this forum, please read the comments below to make sure that the information you are providing is pertinent to the discussion and has not already been addressed before.

Community Comments

Status in current code

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.)

Proposed changes

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.

if you read the statement by the Duke faculty members you will find that they did not pre-judge the accused though in retrospect they have been reputed to have done so. Surely Cornell must be able to take concurrent steps against a student accused of a serious offense, as happened recently for example, with Atkind.

« Jurisdiction over Persons | 2007Fall | Violations »