Proposed Language: 
Proceeding the paragraph that begins, "The principle of freedom and responsibility is central to Cornell University." add a new paragraph

Cornell University affirms that free and open inquiry is essential to its academic mission. Expressive activity, including the communication of ideas that may be unpopular, offensive, or contentious, is protected and expected within a learning community committed to “… any person … any study.” The Code does not regulate speech based on viewpoint or content, and the expression of ideas, alone, does not constitute a violation of this Code. However, expressive activity, including activity permitted under University Policy 4.23, does not exempt students from compliance with the Student Code of Conduct. When conduct occurring in the context of expressive activity involves behavior prohibited by this Code—such as unlawful entry, property damage, conduct that materially disrupts University operations, or other prohibited conduct—the response is directed solely at the prohibited conduct, not the message expressed. 

Current Language:
Additional langugage proposed

Proposed Language: 
B. Assault or Endangerment

Current Language:
B. Assault and Endangerment

Proposed Language: 
D. Bribery

To offer, solicit, promise, give, or accept anything of value to influence the decision or action of a University employee or student for personal gain.

Current Language:
C. Bribery

To bribe a University employee or student for personal gain.

Proposed Language: 
F. Collusion or Complicity

To aid or assist another person, including a person invited to campus by the individual, to commit a violation of the Code.

Current Language:
D. Collusion or Complicity

To participate, aid or assist another person, including a guest invited to campus by the individual, to commit a violation of the Code.

Proposed Language: 
E. Cannabis and Marijuana Related Behavior

1. Possessing cannabis and marijuana or cannabis and marijuana paraphernalia on campus, regardless of age;

2. Consuming cannabis and marijuana on campus, regardless of age;

3. Providing cannabis to an individual under legal age of consumption;

4. Manufacturing or selling cannabis and marijuana without a license;

Current Language:
New language proposed

Proposed Language: 
C. Behavior Related to Controlled Substances, Excluding Cannabis and Marijuana

1. Unlawfully distributing, or providing any controlled substances, excluding cannabis and marijuana, to others;

2. Possessing or consuming controlled substances, excluding cannabis and marijuana, and prescription medication specifically prescribed to the individual in possession and/or consuming it;

3. Manufacturing controlled substances without a license;

4. Possessing drug paraphernalia for the purposes of manufacture, distribution, or dispensation of any controlled substances, excluding cannabis and marijuana;

5. Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of any controlled substance, excluding cannabis and marijuana.

Current Language:
G. Drug-Related Behavior

To unlawfully manufacture, distribute, dispense, possess, use, or sell marijuana or any controlled substances, including prescription medication not prescribed to the user, as defined by state or federal law, including, but not limited to:

1. Possessing drug paraphernalia for the purposes of manufacture, distribution, or dispensation of marijuana or any controlled substances;

2. Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of marijuana or any controlled substance, including prescription medication not prescribed to the user

Proposed Language: 
P. Obstruction of Student Conduct Process

Current Language:
O. Obstruction with Code of Conduct Investigation and Adjudication Process

Proposed Language: 
Delete from the existing provision and create a new Retaliation provision

T. Retaliation
To threaten or take adverse action against an individual or student organization for the purpose of interfering with an individual or student organization’s rights under the Student Code of Conduct and/or the Student Code of Conduct Procedures, including but not limited to making a good faith report of prohibited conduct or for their participation in an investigation, proceeding or hearing.

Current Language:
O. Obstruction with Code of Conduct Investigation and Adjudication Process

…6. Retaliating against another person for participating in the Code process;

Proposed Language: 
V. Unauthorized Entry or Use of Space

1. To enter upon or make use of University or private property or facilities without authorization;  

2. To enter any waters of Fall Creek, Cascadilla Creek, or Beebe Lake that are on or traverse the campus to swim or bathe, except in those waters officially designated as swimming or bathing waters;  

3. Building a structure on the campus without a permit or in violation of the conditions of a permit. 

Current Language:
T. Unauthorized Entry or Use of Space

To enter upon or make use of University or private property or facilities without authorization, including:  

1. To enter any waters of Fall Creek, Cascadilla Creek, or Beebe Lake that are on or traverse the campus to swim or bathe, except in those waters officially designated as swimming or bathing waters;  

2. Building a structure on the campus without a permit or in violation of the conditions of a permit. 

Proposed Language: 
II. ADMINISTRATION OF THE CODE AND PROCEDURES

....

E. The Review Panel Chair  
Each June, the employee members of the Hearing and Review Board shall select one of themselves to serve as Review Panel Chair for a one-year term. If they fail to elect a Review Panel Chair by June 30 of a given year, the Director may appoint a Review Panel Chair from among them for either the full term or on a temporary basis. The Review Panel Chair does not vote on individual cases. The Review Panel Chair shall participate in relevant training as required by the Director.

Current Language:
II. ADMINISTRATION OF THE CODE AND PROCEDURES

....

E. The Review Panel Chair  
Each June, the faculty members of the Hearing and Review Board shall selectone of themselves to serve as Review Panel Chair for a one-year term. If the faculty members of the Hearing and Review Board fail to elect a Review Panel Chair by June 30 of a given year, the Director may appoint a Review Panel Chair from among them for either the full term or on a temporary basis. The Review Panel Chair does not vote on individual cases. The Review Panel Chair shall participate in relevant training as required by the Director.

Proposed Language: 
III. DESIGNATION AS COMPLAINANT AND RESPONDENT

....

A student or organization against whom a Report or Formal Complaint has been made will be designated the “Respondent.”

Current Language:
III. DESIGNATION AS COMPLAINANT AND RESPONDENT

....

A student or organization against whom a Report or Complaint has been made will be designated the “Respondent.”

Proposed Language: 
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE PROCEDURES

These Procedures will apply in all cases where any reports of alleged prohibited conduct are made on or after the effective date of these Procedures.

Current Language:
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE PROCEDURES

These Procedures will apply in all cases where a Report or Formal Complaint of alleged prohibited conduct is made on or after the effective date of these Procedures.

Proposed Language: 
VI. COMPUTATION OF DEADLINES

Current Language:
VI. COMPUTATION OF DEADINES

Proposed Language: 
VIII.       INTERIM MEASURES AND EMERGENCY SUSPENSIONS
A.        Interim Measures

Interim Measures put in place or offered by the University as appropriate and reasonably available before, during or after the filing of a Formal Complaint.  Interim Measures may be in the form of support for or restrictions upon one or both parties. Restrictive Interim Measures are intended to be time-limited in nature, and will be calibrated to address a perceived risk but tailored to minimize to the extent possible the impact on the affected party or parties, whose underlying case of prohibited conduct has not yet been adjudicated on the merits.

Interim Measures may be issued upon a party’s request or at the University’s own initiative. In all instances, the University will, at its discretion, determine whether any given Interim Measure is reasonable and appropriate.

Examples of Interim Measures include but are not limited to:
1.        assistance obtaining access to counseling, advocacy, or medical services;
2.        assistance obtaining access to academic support and requesting academic accommodations;
3.        assistance with changes in class schedule;
4.        assistance requesting changes in work schedules, job assignments, or other work accommodations;
5.        changes in campus housing;
6.        restrictive orders (e.g. restrictions on utilization of University property and/or facilities, moratorium on organizational social activities); and
7.        “No-contact” orders (curtailing or prohibiting contact or communications between or among individuals).

The Director is responsible for issuing Interim Measures. In the case of restrictive interim measures, the Director will provide the Respondent with a written rationale for its issuance. The Director has the discretion to issue, modify, or remove any Interim Measures at any time additional information is gathered or circumstances change.

B.        Requested Review of Interim Measures

The parties may at any time request that the Director issue, modify, or remove Interim Measures based upon a change in circumstance or new information that would affect the necessity of any Interim Measures.

Both parties may petition the Vice President of Student and Campus Life (VPSCL) or designee in writing to review the Director’s decision whether to issue, modify, or remove Interim Measures. A party may seek such review only if the Interim Measure directly impacts that party. A party seeks review by submitting a letter explaining the reason for their request for review and including any written information in support of such request. The materials should be submitted to OSCCS, who will forward all materials to the VPSCL.

If, based upon the request, the VPSCL is considering issuing, modifying, or removing an Interim Measure, the VPSCL may invite the non-requesting party, depending on the nature of the Interim Measure and at the discretion of the VP SCL or designee, and/or the Director to submit responses. The VPSCL will establish a reasonable timeline for handling the matter, including deadlines for submissions.

If the VPSCL determines that the Interim Measures should be modified or removed, the VPSCL will instruct the Director to do so immediately. The VPSCL may, but is not required to, provide the Director with guidance regarding appropriate alternative Interim Measures. The Director may impose alternative Interim Measures, if appropriate.

The VPSCL will provide a written decision to the parties and the Director.

The decision of the VPSCL is final; there is no right to appeal.

C.        Emergency Suspension Pending Resolution
In consultation with appropriate University officials, the Director or other Presidential delegate  (“Issuing Official”) has authority to suspend a Respondent pending resolution of the underlying case in extraordinary circumstances, where immediate action is necessary to protect the Complainant or the University community. Emergency suspension of an individual student is the withdrawal of any or all University privileges and services, including class attendance, participation in examinations, utilization of University premises and facilities. Emergency suspension of a registered or recognized organization requires it cease all activities, including but not limited to: engaging in recruitment, new member education or on-boarding, facilitating general or leadership meetings, hosting/co-hosting educational, philanthropic, or social events, or any other activity associated with the organization.

Since the underlying allegation of prohibited conduct has not yet been adjudicated on the merits, an emergency suspension may be imposed only when available less restrictive measures are reasonably deemed insufficient to protect the Complainant or the University community.

1.        Emergency Suspension of an Individual 
In determining whether an emergency suspension of an individual Respondent is appropriate, a comprehensive assessment must be conducted, including but not limited to a review of the impact of the Respondent’s behavior on individual and public safety, the impact of the Respondent’s behavior on university operations (including teaching and learning), the Respondent’s conduct history, and the impact an emergency suspension may have on the Respondent. While no one factor is determinative or necessary, the following factors, among others, should be considered in this assessment:
a.        Whether the reported information or incident posed an objective threat to the physical safety of others;
b.        Whether the Respondent’s behavior involved the use of force or the threat or actual use of a weapon;
c.        Whether there exists a reasonable basis for concern over possible harm to the health or safety of others involved or the campus community generally, including whether the Respondent has a history of similar behavior and/or  whether the incident represents escalation in unlawful conduct;
d.        Whether there exists reasonable basis for ongoing concern over possible impact on or disruption to university operations, including teaching and learning 
e.        The Respondent’s conduct history, including whether the Respondent has multiple unresolved conduct referrals;
f.         Whether there represents reasonable basis of concern for retaliatory acts;

The issuing Official will provide the Respondent with a written determination detailing the basis for the emergency suspension, a copy of the underlying incident report and any additional documentation collected as part of the emergency suspension assessment.

2.        Emergency Suspension of an Organization

In determining whether an emergency suspension of a registered or recognized student organization Respondent is appropriate, a comprehensive assessment must be conducted, including but not limited to a review of the impact of the Respondent organization’s behavior on individual, organizational, and public safety, the impact of the Respondent organization’s behavior on university operations (including teaching and learning), and the Respondent organization’s conduct history. While no one factor is determinative or necessary, the following factors, among others, should be considered in this assessment:

a.        Whether the reported information or incident posed an objective threat to the physical safety of others
b.        Whether the Respondent organization’s behavior involved the use of force or the threat or actual use of a weapon
c.        Whether there exists a reasonable basis for concern over possible harm to health or safety of others (whether members, non-members, or guests of the organization) or the broader campus community generally, including whether the Respondent organization has a history of similar behavior and/or whether the incident represents an escalation in prohibited conduct
d.        Whether there exists a reasonable basis for ongoing concern over possible impact on or disruption to university operations, including teaching and learning
e.        The Respondent organization’s conduct history, including whether the Respondent organization has multiple unresolved conduct referrals or a pattern of non-compliance with university policies
f.         Whether there exists a reasonable basis of concern for retaliatory acts by the Respondent organization or its members
g.        Whether the Respondent organization failed to comply with interim measures or directives previously issued by the University
h.        Whether the nature of the alleged conduct involves high-risk behaviors that cannot be mitigated through less restrictive measures
i.         Whether, in the case of a registered or recognized student organization, a temporary suspension is required by university policy. 

The Issuing Official will provide the Respondent organization with a written determination detailing the basis for the emergency suspension.

D.        Ongoing Assessment by the Issuing Official
The Issuing Official may at any time modify or lift an emergency suspension based upon a change in circumstance or new information that would affect the necessity of the emergency suspension.

In addition, if an emergency suspension against an individual Respondent remains in effect at the conclusion of the academic term in which it was issued, the Issuing Official will conduct a reassessment of the necessity of the emergency suspension prior to the commencement of the following fall or spring term and each fall or spring term thereafter. If the Issuing Official determines the emergency suspension remains necessary to protect the Complainant or the University, the Issuing Official will provide the Respondent with an updated written determination detailing the basis for the continuation of the emergency suspension.
E.        Review of Emergency Suspension of Students

The Respondent may submit a written request to lift the emergency suspension to a panel comprised of the VP SCL, Provost, and the Dean of the Academic College of the Respondent (or each individual’s designee). The Issuing Official may submit a response, which shall be shared with the Respondent. The Respondent is strongly encouraged to submit their request to lift the emergency suspension as soon as possible, and generally no later than a week from the date it is issued. The Issuing Official will promptly reply, and the panel will review the matter as soon as possible, generally no later than three weeks from the date the emergency suspension was issued. A delay by the Respondent in initiating the review process may impact the Respondent’s ability to return to class attendance and other academic coursework in the term the emergency suspension was issued regardless of the outcome of the review.

If the panel determines that good cause for the emergency suspension is inadequate or absent, that other less restrictive alternatives are available that would allow the Respondent to continue academically while affording the necessary protectors, or that circumstances have changed so that the suspension is no longer necessary, the emergency suspension will be immediately lifted. The panel may simultaneously provide the Issuing Official guidance regarding appropriate alternative interim measures, and such alternatives are within the Issuing Official ’s continuing authority. The panel’s decision regarding the written request is final.

In addition, any individual Respondent may submit a new written request to lift the emergency suspension with the panel if the Issuing Official determines the emergency suspension remains necessary to protect the Complainant or the University in subsequent fall or spring terms following the term in which it was issued, consistent with Section D above. This review will be completed in a timely manner. The Issuing Official may submit a response, which shall be shared with the Respondent. If the panel determines that good cause for continuing the emergency suspension is inadequate or absent, that other less restrictive alternatives are available that would allow the Respondent to continue academically while affording the necessary protections, or that circumstances have changed so that the suspension is no longer necessary, the emergency suspension will be immediately lifted. The panel may simultaneously provide the Issuing Official guidance regarding appropriate alternative interim measures, and such alternatives remain with the Issuing Official’s continuing authority. The panel’s decision regarding the new written request is final.

F.        Review of Emergency Suspension of Organizations

The Respondent organization may submit a written request to lift the emergency suspension with the VP SCL or designee. The Issuing Official may submit a response, which shall be shared with the Respondent organization. The Respondent is strongly encouraged to submit their request to lift the emergency suspension as soon as possible. The Issuing Official will promptly reply, and the request will be reviewed as soon as possible, generally no later than three weeks from the date the emergency suspension was issued. Any delay by the Respondent in initiating the review process may lengthen the period during which the organization is unable to operate.

If the VP SCL determines that good cause for the emergency suspension is inadequate or absent, that other restrictive alternatives are available that would allow the Respondent organization to continue operating while affording the necessary protections, or that circumstances have changed so that the suspension is no longer necessary, the emergency suspension will be immediately lifted. The VP SCL may simultaneously provide the Issuing Official guidance regarding appropriate alternative interim measures, and such alternatives are within the Issuing Official’s continuing authority The VP SCL’s decision regarding the written request is final.

Current Language:
VIII. TEMPORARY SUSPENSIONS A. Temporary Suspension Pending Resolution In consultation with appropriate University officials, the Director or other Presidential delegate3 (“Issuing Official”) has authority to temporarily suspend a Respondent pending resolution of the underlying case where immediate action is necessary to protect the Complainant or the University community. Temporary Suspension may include the withdrawal of any or all University privileges and services, including class attendance, participation in examinations, utilization of University premises and facilities, and in the case of an organization, recognition or registration by the University, as determined by the Director.  

Since the underlying allegation of prohibited conduct has not yet been adjudicated on the merits, a Temporary Suspension may be imposed only when available less restrictive measures are reasonably deemed insufficient to protect the Complainant or the University community. Further, the form of Temporary Suspension imposed shall be the least restrictive option that reasonably affords the necessary protections. In determining whether a Temporary Suspension is appropriate, the following factors, among others, should be considered:

1. Respondent’s Conduct History:  

The Respondents history should be considered in the following manner: 
a. Whether the Respondent has a history of violent behavior or is a repeat offender;
b. Whether the incident represents escalation in unlawful conduct;
c. Whether there are facts indicating a risk that the Respondent will commit additional acts of interpersonal misconduct or violence; and
d. Whether there represents reasonable basis of concern for retaliatory acts;
e. Whether there exists reasonable basis for concern over possible harm to the health or safety of others involved or the campus community generally;
f. Whether the respondent used a weapon or force;
g. Whether, in the case of a registered or recognized student organization, relevant university policy requires a temporary suspension

B.   Review of Temporary Suspension of Students and Organizations

The Respondent may file a written request to lift the Temporary Suspension with the VP SCL. The Issuing Official may file a response. If the VP SCL determines that good cause for the Temporary Suspension is inadequate or absent, that other less restrictive alternatives are available, or that circumstances have changed so that the suspension is no longer necessary, the Temporary Suspension will be immediately lifted. The VP SCL may simultaneously provide the Issuing 3For example, the Dean of Students. 9 Official guidance regarding appropriate alternate interim measures, and such alternatives are within the Issuing Official ’s continuing authority. The VP SCL’s decision is final for all Temporary Suspension actions that continue to enable the Respondent to maintain core instructional activities and there is no further right of appeal. A complete suspension from all university activities such that the Respondent will lose the ability to continue academically may be appealed to the Provost, whose decision in such cases will be final. 

Proposed Language: 
X. NOTICE OF PARTIES OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

A. The Notice should include:

....

9. Inform the parties specifically of their right to an advisor of their choosing or a Code Counselor, and provide a description of the Code Counselors’ services and the contact information of the respective Code Counselor’s office;

Current Language:
X. NOTICE OF PARTIES OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

A. The Notice should include:

....

9. Inform the parties specifically of their right to a counsel/advisor of their choosing or a Codes Counselor, and provide a description of the Counselors’ services and the contact information of the respective Counselor’s office;

Proposed Language: 
XI. ADVISORS AND SUPPORT PERSONS

At all stages under these Procedures, both the Complainant and Respondent will be afforded the assistance of an advisor provided through the Offices of the Complainants’ Code Counselor and Respondents’ Code Counselor to assist and advise. Alternatively, each party has the right to select and consult with an advisor of their own choosing. Both the Complainant and Respondent also have the right to a support person of their choice.

Current Language:
XI. COUNSELORS/ADVISORS AND SUPPORT PERSONS

At all stages under these Procedures, both the Complainant and Respondent will be afforded the assistance of an advisor provided through the Offices of the Complainants’ Code Counselor and Respondents’ Code Counselor to assist and advise. Alternatively, each party has the right to select and consult with an advisor of their own choosing. Both the Complainant and Respondent also have the right to a support person of their choice.

Proposed Language: 
XV. ALTERNATE RESOLUTION OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

The investigation may be paused during the Alternate Resolution process at the discrection of the Director depending on concerns related to fariness to the parties, risk of retaliation, and impact to the integrity of the investigation and resolution process.

Current Language:
XV. ALTERNATE RESOLUTION OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

The investigation will be paused during the Alternate Resolution Process.

Proposed Language: 
XVIII. INVESTIGATION OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

G. Parties' Review of the Draft Investigative Record

Upon completion of the investigation, the investigator will prepare and provide to the parties an electronic or hard copy of a draft investigative record.

1. Contents of Investigative Record

Current Language:
XVIII. INVESTIGATION OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

G. Draft Investigative Record and the Parties’ Review

Upon completion of the investigation, the investigator will prepare and provide to the parties an electronic or hard copy of a draft investigative record.

1. Contents of Investigative Report

Proposed Language: 
XVIII. INVESTIGATION OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

2. Timeline for Parties to Review Draft Investigative Record

The parties will have five (5) business days to review the draft investigative record and submit in writing requests, including making comments:
a. To address corrections of spellings or grammatical errors, clarification of information or objective inaccuracies
b. Additional redactions consistent with the Procedures;
c. Inclusion of content deemed irrelevant or duplicative by the investigator;
d. Additional meetings with the investigator; or
e. Investigator to conduct further investigation or questioning.

The investigator has complete discretion whether to grant such requests. The parties’ approved written comments and requests will become part of the final investigative record. The investigator’s excluded comments and requests will be preserved separately. 

Current Language:
XVIII. INVESTIGATION OF A FORMAL COMPLAINT

....

2. Timeline for Parties to Review Draft Investigative Record

The parties will have five (5) business days to review the draft investigative record and submit in writing:
a. Any comments about content, including requests for redaction;
b. Any requests for the investigator to conduct further investigation or questioning.

The investigator has complete discretion whether to grant such requests. The parties’ written comments and requests will become part of the final investigative record.

Proposed Language: 
XX. HEARINGS

.....

H. Hearing Process and Format

....

4. Impact/Mitigation Statement

The parties are permitted, but not required, to prepare a written Impact/Mitigation Statement relevant to any sanctions. The parties may submit the statement at the end of a hearing, but are advised to begin to compose such statements in advance. The statements are distributed to the Hearing Panel only upon a finding of responsibility and are included with the Hearing Panel’s written decision to the parties.

Current Language:
XX. HEARINGS

.....

H. Hearing Process and Format

....

4. Impact/Mitigation Statement

The parties are permitted, but not required, to prepare a written Impact/Mitigation Statement relevant to any sanctions. The parties may submit the statement up until the end of a hearing, but are advised to begin to compose such statements in advance. The statements are distributed to the Hearing Panel only upon a finding of responsibility and are included with the Hearing Panel’s written decision to the parties.

Proposed Language: 
Delete Request for a Stay Pending Appeal section and add clarifying statement at the end of list of sanctions available for student organizations on page 24.

Sanctions and remedies will be effective at the conclusion of the Appeal, or at ten business days after the Hearing Panel decisions, if neither of the parties appeals.

Current Language:
XXII. REQUEST FOR A STAY PENDING APPEAL

The Review Panel may, but is not required to, stay a sanction where the appealing party demonstrates the need for a stay by a clear showing. An application for a stay must be submitted to the Director. The Director will provide a copy of the stay application to the Review Panel and the other party, who is entitled to respond to the stay application by submitting to the Director a written response. The Review Panel will set a reasonable timeline for handling the stay application, including a deadline for the other party to respond to the stay application. The decision to issue a stay or not is not appealable. The Review Panel has discretion to reconsider its decision on a stay at any time during the appeal. The stay expires at the conclusion of the appeal.