In an email to students last Friday, the Student Affairs Committee highlighted extensive “troubling” changes made to the Rules of University Conduct over the summer, expressing concerns over a lack of transparency from the Board of Trustees.

In an email sent to the Columbia community on Friday, October 3, the University Senate Student Affairs Committee highlighted several recent changes to University Statutes made by the Board of Trustees. The changes include significant revisions to rules regarding campus protests and demonstrations, disciplinary proceedings, and sanctions.

According to the Student Affairs Committee, “the University Senate had no role in these changes, nor [were they] made aware of these changes through normal channels of communication.” They also noted the removal of policies requiring that all changes to Rules of University Conduct be approved by the Senate, emphasizing that “these changes were made in disregard of the established principles and procedures of shared governance at Columbia.”

Changes to protest and demonstration policies include the prohibition of all demonstrations inside academic buildings, the prohibition of face masks worn “for the purpose of concealing one’s identity while violating a University policy,” and the subjugation of all demonstration activity to anti-discrimination and harassment policies. 

Several changes were made to disciplinary proceedings, including limitations on respondents’ rights and expanded authority for Public Safety Officers and other University officials. Notably, respondents to disciplinary action can no longer request that hearings be open to the public, and their access to University documents or camera footage is now subject to the discretion of the Rules Administrator. The University Senate’s role in governing the code of conduct has also been amended to not include “any of the matters addressed in Article XLIV of the Statutes, any University policy on discrimination or harassment or any policy administered by the Center for Student Success and Intervention.”

The changes also include additions to sanctions, which give the University the flexibility to impose indefinite degree revocations and suspensions.  

The Student Affairs Committee noted that while the changes to protest and demonstration policies were outlined in Columbia’s recent cooperation with the Trump Administration to restore federal funding, the changes regarding jurisdiction, disciplinary proceedings, and sanctions were not. The Committee chairs wrote that they “encourage students to individually review the updated Rules of University Conduct in full […] [and] to share their thoughts and concerns so that [the Committee] may better advocate on their behalf.”

Email sent to the Columbia community at 3:33 pm on Friday, October 3, 2025:

Dear Columbia students, 

We write to alert you to the extensive changes made to the University Statutes by the University’s Board of Trustees. We highlight in particular changes to Chapter XLIV (Rules of University Conduct), the chapter that concerns policy on protest and demonstration, including new procedures for disciplinary proceedings and sanctions. These changes also explicitly modify rules regarding demonstrations held by collective bargaining agents. While the changes to the Rules of University Conduct pertaining to protest and demonstration activity appear in Columbia’s recent agreement with the federal government (§27, p. 11-12), the changes to jurisdiction, disciplinary proceedings and sanctions do not appear as subject to the agreement. 

We find these changes troubling. First, these changes were made over the summer, while our students and faculty were largely absent from campus and thus unavailable for broad consultation and collaboration. Second, we feel it is inappropriate for Columbia to pull back from the standards of deliberation and consensus building that normally govern campus decision-making, especially at a time when civil liberties and democratic institutions are under threat. With these concerns in mind we cite a selection of these changes, and encourage students to individually review the updated Rules of University Conduct in full.

We emphasize that the University Senate had no role in these changes, nor was the Senate made aware of these changes through normal channels of communication, but rather discovered them through independent research and monitoring. The statutory authority of the Senate over the Rules of University Conduct, set out previously in §452, has been removed. §452 had required that “all changes in these Rules shall be passed by the University Senate for approval and acceptance by the Trustees in accordance with the Statutes of the University.” These changes were made in disregard of the established principles and procedures of shared governance at Columbia.

We are unaware of how these changes will impact the community long-term. As Chairs of the Student Affairs Committee, we encourage students to share their thoughts and concerns so that we may better advocate on their behalf.

Changes to Protest and Demonstration Policies

• All demonstration activity is now “subject to the University’s anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies” (§440, p. 137).
  
• All demonstrations and other protest activities “that occur inside academic buildings and places where academic activities take place” are now prohibited (§442, p. 140).
  
• Masks “for the purpose of concealing one’s identity while violating a University policy or rule or state, municipal, or local law” are now prohibited and anyone, masked or unmasked, must present a valid ID when asked by a University Delegate OR a Public Safety Officer (§444, p. 144-5).

Change to Jurisdiction

• The Rules now apply to all individuals regardless of their employee status with the University or representation by a collective bargaining agent, with the new addition, “except when those individuals participate in a demonstration that constitutes a bona fide protected concerted activity within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act” (§442, p. 140).

Changes to Disciplinary Proceedings

• The previous two-month time frame for resolving a report of misconduct is now an indefinite time frame, with the qualification that “the University will seek to resolve every report of misconduct as promptly as possible” (§446, p. 148;  §448, p. 150).
• Respondents no longer have the right to request that a hearing be open to the public (§448, p. 153, relevant stipulation was removed in August 2025)
  Disciplinary proceedings may now be recorded on a respondent’s permanent record even if the respondent has been found not responsible for a Rules violation (§449, p. 156, relevant stipulation was removed in August 2025)
• Respondents’ rights to request access to University documents or camera footage are now limited, with the Rules Administrator having full discretion to deny requests for access (§446, p. 148)
• Powers entrusted to Delegates may now be exercised by other University officials, including Public Safety Officers (§443, p. 142–3)
• The University Senate’s duty to “promulgate a code of conduct for faculty, students and staff and provide for its enforcement” is amended with the addition that “such code shall not include any of the matters addressed in Article XLIV of the Statutes, any University policy on discrimination or harassment or any policy administered by the Center for Student Success and Intervention (or successor group)” (§23, p. 23)

Changes to Sanctions

• An addition has been made to the sanction “revocation of degree” that it may be “(limited or indefinite), with any applicable conditions for reinstatement” (§449, p. 159).
• An addition has been made to the sanction “suspension (limited time or indefinite)” that there may be “any applicable conditions for return” (§449, p. 159).

Guidelines to the Rules of University Conduct

The Guidelines to the Rules of University Conduct were prepared by the Rules of University Conduct Committee to facilitate implementation and application of the Rules and were endorsed by the University Senate in August 2024. We understand that the Guidelines are no longer in effect and while some elements have been incorporated into the current University Statutes, the following have not:

• Specifics about permissible time, place and manner of protests
• The provision that groups may not be sanctioned for the behavior of an individual, and that individuals may not be sanctioned for the behavior of a group unless there is evidence about the individual’s own conduct
• The discussion of restorative justice
• The provision that the University Judicial Board shall seek consistency and uniformity in the sanctions it imposes
• The provision on credentials for student media
• The provision on written witness statements
• The provision that “interim sanctions may not impact a respondent’s access to their housing, dining or healthcare services unless their alleged conduct involved serious actual or threatened harm to or in such facilities”

Lastly, while not an amendment to the University Statutes, a clarification was added to Columbia’s University Policies webpage on the Rules of University Conduct that “for the purposes of this policy, the term ‘University’ includes Columbia University only. It does not include affiliate institutions, including Barnard College or Teachers College.”

Respectfully,

Matthew Beck, Graduate Co-Chair (’28 SEAS)

Huda Paracha, Undergraduate Co-Chair (’26 Barnard)

Helen Han Wei Luo, Vice Chair (’27 GSAS)

Columbia via Columbia