In June, the Board on Judicial Affairs (BJA), a 15-member committee composed of students, faculty and administrators, voted to adopt eight bylaws to the Student Judicial Charter, aiming to clarify the policies and procedures to be followed during Stanford’s judicial process.
The Graduate Student Council (GSC) last Wednesday approved a bill overturning eight new bylaws to the Student Judicial Charter, in part because members said they had not been included in conversations before the bylaws were adopted.
The decision came nearly five months after the Board on Judicial Affairs (BJA) first adopted the bylaws and a day after the Undergraduate Senate, in a split 7-7 vote, failed to pass a counterpart bill that would have overturned the same bylaws.
With a split 7-7 vote, the 15th Undergraduate Senate decided not to overturn the newly adopted Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA) bylaws.
Per the Charter, the co-chairs of the BJA “forward[ed] the text of the changes to the chair of the Undergraduate Senate of the Associated Students of Stanford University.
Next Tuesday, the 15th Undergraduate Senate will vote on a bill to overrule changes made to bylaws of the Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA) without obtaining input from the Senate.
But for all their virtues, the Honor Code and Fundamental Standard suffer from a woeful lack of familiarity among students and faculty. That was the conclusion of a committee that recently reviewed the Stanford judicial process.
Representatives of the Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA) subsequently spoke about revisions to the ARP.