Illustration by Cindy Pan

In an email sent today addressed to the student body of Columbia College, Jared Odessky (CC’15) and Sejal Singh (CC’15), undergraduate representatives to the University Senate, formally announced plans to review the content of the Rules of University Conduct (RUC).

Odessky and Singh both sit on the Rules Committee on the University Senate, which as we reported last spring was created to oversee this review of the RUC and ensure adequate public feedback. The review was prompted by concerns, expressed both by the Senate that the RUC may be outdated, might be needlessly complex, or could be applied in way unjust to university students.

As of now the consequences of this review are unclear. In large part they will be determined by the student body, who will have the opportunity to express themselves both through direct petition and in a series of town halls. Currently the only revision under discussion is the possible end to independent arbitration, an option currently available through the hearing process.

Although the outcome may remain open at this time, this review could have an enormous impact on the day to day functioning of the student body. As Odessky and Singh state, the RUC applies to all members of the university, ranging from students to faculty to campus organizations. As it stands now, it can be applied to justify everything from disciplinary warnings to expulsion.

Dear Columbia College,

For the first time in decades, the rules governing free speech and protest on campus are under review by the University Senate. The Rules of University Conduct, first introduced after the 1968 protests and made permanent in the 1970s, are designed to protect the rights of free expression while at the same time ensuring the continued functioning of the University and the protection of the rights of those who may be affected by such demonstrations. All members of the University community are subject to these Rules, including students, faculty, and organizations — and punishments for students can range from a disciplinary warning, to suspension, and even expulsion.

We, Jared Odessky (CC’15) and Sejal Singh (CC’15), are the undergraduate representatives on the Rules Committee of the University Senate. We will be working alongside graduate students Zila Acosta (LAW), Lindsey Dayton (GSAS), and Zahrah Taufique (P&S), in addition to faculty and administrators on the Rules Committee. The Committee is taking this opportunity to review the content of the Rules, including the process by which Rules violations are prosecuted and the severity of authorized sanctions. The full text is attached here for your reference.

One major concern is that the Rules of University Conduct are broadly written and could be applied to punish students at many of the on-campus protests we have seen in the last four years at Columbia. Since the 1970s, only a handful of students have been formally disciplined for conduct related to free speech activity. But as the Rules are currently written, we cannot say with confidence that this pattern will continue since responsibility for administering the Rules can potentially shift between administrators or offices.

The Rules Committee has also identified the hearing process as a possible area of revision. Currently, students charged with Rules violations may choose to be heard under the internal Dean’s Discipline process or by an external arbiter. Some members of the Rules Committee believe the external process is problematic — it requires students to secure their own legal representation and has been costly, time-consuming, and burdensome for the University. Other members of the Committee, however, are skeptical that an internal process can be truly impartial.

While these issues have been singled out, the entire text of the Rules is up for evaluation, so there is no need to feel limited by this framing when raising any possible concerns.

We are deeply invested in ensuring that this review process includes student voices at every step of the way. Our active role on the Rules Committee is one piece of that. But we are only two students tasked with representing and ultimately protecting the rights of the entire undergraduate population, and we’re going to need your help! We have pushed for the review process to be as open and transparent as possible, securing a guarantee for three town halls to solicit feedback. The first two town halls will take place in mid-October and early November, after which the Rules Committee will decide if it wishes to propose any changes to the Rules. If so, the Committee will prepare recommendations in December and host a third town hall in January to garner any additional feedback before proceeding to the University Senate, where the Committee’s proposal will be debated. Each town hall will be open to all CUID holders.

We strongly encourage you to voice your thoughts and concerns, either by attending the town halls, emailing us, or arranging an in-person meeting. We have already begun reaching out to groups that may be affected, and we welcome any concerned students or student groups to meet with us and share their concerns.

Thank you,

Jared Odessky, CC’15
jho2115@columbia.edu

Sejal Singh, CC’15
ss4120@columbia.edu

Illustration from our archives