The University of Wisconsin now has the authority to discipline students for off-campus criminal offenses after the Board of Regents changed the system’s misconduct codes last month.?
Chapters 17 and 18 of the University of Wisconsin Administrative Code outline a set of disciplinary procedures for the UW System. Chapter 17 explains rules and procedures for non-academic misconduct, while Chapter 18 deals with conduct on university property.?
According to Michael Moscicke, university affairs director for the United Council of UW Students, while he was initially skeptical to changes in the code, the turnout couldn’t have been better.
“We never liked the idea that universities were extending their control, especially off campus,” Moscicke said. “But that is why we fought for a more narrow control in the code of conduct, using specific language.”
Ervin Cox, director of student assistance and judicial affairs, said the changes made to the code were necessary but do not change much for students.
“[The university] always had the ability to take action for off-campus behavior. Now there is just more discretion with the victim if they are not a UW student,” Cox said.
Cox added students should not be worried that the codes will allow the university to discipline for minor offenses such as an underage drinking ticket.
Rather, the changes were made to clear up confusion of wording in the code and help clarify punishment for more serious crimes such as sexual assault.
Cox also said he would like to hear from students on the issue, specifically what they consider as serious offenses that should be punishable by the changed code.?
Adam Kissel, director for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education defense program, said the revisions are seen as a success for due process and student rights.
“The final version states the crime must be severe and repeated, and that change is better for students because such things as noise violations are not included in this,” Kissel said.
Along with changing what crimes can be dealt with by the university, the revisions now allow a lawyer to play a more active role in the hearings. This means if a student chooses to hire a lawyer, they are able to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses, which previously was not allowed.
Cox said he is concerned this change will not be fair to all students since some cannot afford an attorney.
“There is definitely a social justice issue at play. I also worry about the victim. … Should he or she have to hire a lawyer?” Cox added.
But Kissel, said he doesn’t think it’s the university’s concern if a student can afford a good lawyer or not.?
Moscicke said the revisions? are good for students and if someone cannot afford a lawyer they usually can find an attorney that would be willing to represent them for free.
