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.
The Graduate Student Council (GSC) voted unanimously to approve the Alternative Review Process (ARP), Stanford’s revised judicial procedure for sexual assault and harassment cases, at its Feb. 6 meeting.
The ASSU Undergraduate Senate unanimously approved the Alternative Review Process (ARP)–a revised judicial procedure for cases involving sexual assault, relationship violence, sexual harassment and stalking–at its Feb. 5 meeting.
The Department of Education has not complied with the rulemaking processes here, and Stanford University need not follow its lead – and perhaps we ought not to.