On Feb. 18, Stanford’s Board of Judicial Affairs declined to add military affiliation to the list of identities — including race, gender, socioeconomic status and more — explicitly protected under the Fundamental Standard. The University decision followed a request for the change nearly six months prior by Adam Behrendt ’19, president of the Stanford Undergraduate Veteran Association.
Some students and their advisors say the Office of Community Standards’ process for resolving misconduct allegations can be unnecessarily burdensome and still must do more to protect students’ rights. Meanwhile, judicial panelists say they lack the training to rule confidently in specialized cases.
Tuesday evening, the Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA) held an open discussion titled “The Honor Code in the 21st Century.” Dozens of students, faculty and staff members shared their perspectives on current issues involving the Honor Code.
At yesterday’s Faculty Senate meeting, professor Eamonn Callan, co-chair of the Judicial Affairs Internal Review Panel, presented a comprehensive analysis of Stanford’s judicial process that recommends 23 main changes to increase the effectiveness of the Honor Code and Fundamental Standard at the University. The document, titled “The Review of The Student Judicial Process at Stanford…
In response to recent criticism towards the handling of sexual assault cases, a task force comprised of students and faculty had been created in order to reevaluate the University’s efforts to prevent and respond to sexual assault and to foster a safer and more respectful campus community.
Benjamin Holston ‘15, chair of the ASSU Undergraduate Senate, backed away from his claims made at last week’s senate meeting that the Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA) had added eight new bylaws to the Student Judicial Charter of 1997 over the summer without properly soliciting student input.
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.
Students subject to the University’s judicial process may be exposed to a system implicitly slanted towards finding respondents guilty and willfully indifferent to rights enshrined in the Student Judicial Charter of 1997, according to a case study of a 2011 judicial proceeding.