As discussed on Wednesday, 29 November 2006.

To: UA Liaison to CJC
Date: Thursday, 16 November 2006

Dear Ellis,

At its 14 November 2006 meeting, the Codes and Judicial Committee (CJC) of the University Assembly discussed the “Report on a Review and Proposed Revision of he Cornell University Campus Code of Conduct” (the Krause Report) that that was recently presented to the President of the University by Barbara Krause, the Senior Advisor to the President. This report included drafts of documents entitled “Cornell University Disciplinary System” and “Cornell University Conduct Code.”

Recognizing that, according to existing university legislation, the University Assembly is the body empowered to enact all legislation having to do with the campus judicial system, and that the CJC is the University Assembly committee designated to make recommendations concerning these matters, the CJC indicated its willingness, should the University Assembly desire that it do so, to evaluate the Krause Report and make a recommendation to the University Assembly for action on the documents.

The membership of the CJC is drawn from Cornell undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, and staff, and includes representatives from the Judicial Administrator’s (JA’s) office, the Office of Assemblies, and the Cornell Police. Throughout its history, the committee has served to evaluate and clarify the Campus Code through its own recommendations and those coming from various quarters of the university community, including the university counsel’s office and the JA’s office. The CJC makes frequent recommendations to the University Assembly for revisions of the code, and recently made a thorough review of the code.

In its evaluation of the present code of conduct in the context of the revisions proposed by the Krauss Report, the CJC will be concerned with the following matters:

1. That the code presents clear parameters for behavior to ensure the institution’s purpose;
2. That the code states the parameters for behavior in simple and clear language, without abridging rights;
3. That appropriate time tables for process be respected;
4. That an equitable, fair, and independent judicial process be maintained;
5. That the independence and support of the JA’s office and its communication with the community is sufficient.

I have invited the CJC membership to attend the UA meeting on Wednesday, 11/29, at 4:30 in G10 Biotech. to participate in a conversation with you and the community on this very important matter.

My thanks, Kathleen

— Kathleen E. Rourke Chair, Cornell’s Codes & Judicial Committee