Honor code revision proposal fails Undergraduate Senate vote

At their Monday assembly, the Undergraduate Senate (UGS) voted on two separate proposals introduced by the Committee of 12 (C12), voting in favor of the Stanford Judicial Constitution of 2023 and twice declining to approve the up to date Honor Code language coupled with a research into what proctoring may seem like at Stanford.

For the proposed adjustments to the Honor Code be enacted by the College, they’d have to be accepted once more by the Board on Judicial Affairs (BJA), Undergraduate Senate, Graduate Scholar Council (GSC), College Senate and Stanford President.

The UGS’s damaging vote on the Honor Code leaves the proposed revisions to the textual content successfully useless within the water. Senator Priyanka Shrestha ‘24 mentioned that any enhancements that the proposed Honor Code and proctoring adjustments would, in-practice, have modified little or no. “I don’t see it as an enchancment to the established order, presently,” she mentioned.

In the meantime, after efficiently being accepted by the UGS, the Stanford Judicial Constitution of 2023 might be voted on by the College Senate in its April 27 assembly and would require eventual approval by the Stanford President to be adopted by the College.

The vote got here after a years-long course of trying into educational integrity and self-discipline insurance policies at Stanford which included conferences with scholar leaders, neighborhood workplace hours and a previous vote of unanimous approval by the BJA.

Jamie Tremendous, a sixth-year Ph.D. scholar finding out trendy thought and literature serving because the C12 scholar co-chair, mentioned that the 2 proposals earlier than the UGS got here as “the end result of years of labor.” Tremendous famous the significance of the proposals as a compromise between issues comparable to restorative justice and procedural effectivity.

BJA scholar co-chair Glen Husman ‘23 mentioned equally that compromise was core to the adjustments earlier than the UGS.

“I didn’t vote for this stuff as a result of they’re good,” Husman mentioned. Slightly, the proposals symbolize “neighborhood duty and total constructive change.”

The UGS initially failed to achieve a two-thirds majority to go the proposed Judicial Constitution. Nonetheless, UGS Parliamentarian Diego Kagurabadza ‘25 referred to as for the senate to rethink the constitution and after listening to arguments by Kagurabadza — who serves on the UGS’s BJA Committee and is a scholar member of the C12 — a reconsideration vote was held that resulted within the revised constitution’s approval, with some senators who initially voted in opposition to the proposal then selecting to abstain.

UGS co-chair Amira Dehmani ‘24 voiced issues that the proposed mid-tier of the Judicial Constitution, which makes use of a “clear and convincing proof” normal to efficiently cost a scholar, focuses an excessive amount of on effectivity in process somewhat than restorative justice issues for college students.

Senator Pleasure Molloy ‘25 mentioned that the steadiness of effectivity and justice that the C12 sought to strike was “a correct step in the correct path.”

Senator Gurmenjit Bahia ‘24 mentioned “I believe there’s nonetheless work to be performed on this subject.”

Certifying the 2023 ASSU election outcomes

The UGS additionally voted to certify an amended invoice on the outcomes of the 2023 ASSU Spring Normal Election, certifying all annual grant requests and election outcomes aside from this yr’s UGS races.

The choice to not vote on the UGS races was based mostly on the pending case earlier than the ASSU Constitutional Council, Election Commissioner v. Chen (2023) wherein Ivy Chen ‘26 faces expenses of violating ASSU marketing campaign finance guidelines. The Council voted to just accept the case, which it’s set to listen to on Might 1, previous to the UGS vote on the election outcomes.

Kagurabadza expressed an curiosity in submitting his personal amicus transient — an impartial submitting by somebody who will not be a celebration to a case and needs to supply one other perspective to arguments — on behalf of Ivy Chen.

Healthcare Advocacy Committee

The UGS tabled a decision to create a Healthcare Advocacy Committee (HAC) to deal with numerous points associated to healthcare on campus. 

Shrestha cited requests from the Graduate Scholar Council (GSC) for a extra complete invoice on the difficulty on the matter of the decision’s delay to subsequent week’s UGS assembly.

Clarifications to the Annual Grant Course of

The UGS tabled for its assembly subsequent week a invoice which might revise facets of the method by which Annual Grants are accepted. The invoice explicitly outlines new Annual Grant necessities together with {that a} Voluntary Service Group (VSO) can submit one other Annual Grant utility solely upon the complete approval of the UGS Appropriations Committee.

The invoice additionally grants the Committee the power to revise the Annual Grant requests of VSOs. Underneath this course of, the Committee is required to tell VSOs on how a lot of the funds requested it’s prepared to fund and below what circumstances – together with the reallocation or additional documentation of funds – it will approve them. 

Moreover, the Committee must approve any modifications {that a} VSO makes to their Annual Grants. Ought to a VSO be unhappy with the end result of their funds requested, they’ve the choice to petition the overall scholar physique for its approval. The funds {that a} VSO presents to the coed physique, as newly outlined by the invoice, must “be equivalent to the one initially introduced to the Appropriations Committee, that means earlier than modification or revision.”

Adjustments to the construction of the Nominations Fee 

The UGS mentioned a invoice which might modify facets of the ASSU Nominations Fee, the physique of scholars tasked with appointing college students to quite a few College committees together with the Board of Trustees, the Board on Judicial Affairs and the Workplace of the President & Provost. 

The invoice establishes a Upkeep Division for the Nominations Fee meant to help “the coed committee representatives with their service on College committees.” The UGS handed the invoice unanimously.