How far do you go?

Okay, if a university feels it must police the actions of its students no matter where they live, why can’t they do the same to faculty and staff? And why stop there—why not just include the entire citizenry (residents and other unaffiliated persons, including the “street people")of the area under the jurisdiction of the academic leaders, to form a utopia....But wait, isn’t that what a local elected governement does for that municipality? Between on-campus management of student safety (and alcohol and parties and physical safety are legitimate concerns there) and the academic and fiscal management issues, university administration should have enough of a portfolio that they can strive to master without having to add other issues.

Richard, Parent and Admininstrator, at 8:24 am EDT on October 18, 2005

Defending the School

“If it’s 10 people on a deck making noise, we’re probably not going to get involved,” said Tom Dougan, vice president for student affairs. “A party with underage drinking, fights, destruction of property, we’re probably going to get involved.”

The school has the right to know if its students are being arrested for criminal behavior. They’re not concerned about speeding tickets but about serious violations of the law. If a student is arrested, what is always in the newspaper next to his name? the school he’s in. To protect the other students and the school, the administation must be able to act. It’s not like the college has someone sitting at a radio listening to police traffic waiting for something to happen so the school can bring the hammer down. The school and police are working together to provide a safer learning environment.

Ben, Grad Student, at 12:18 pm EDT on October 18, 2005

Ben,

Are you sure that schools have a right to know whether someone is arrested? From where to you get that idea? How do you know they are not concerned about “speeding tickets” but rather “serious violations of the law?” How do you know that students arrested for, say, protesting against a war won’t face disciplinary actions, because, lord knows, many employers detest hippies and anti-abortion fanatics. (I know I sure do, and I would expel anyone caught demonstrating for or against abortion or the war because these people annoy me.) Also, this is the US, you have to explain how an arrest creates a presumption that a certain fact is true, and therefore the student does not belong on campus.

None of what the school has said relates encouraging a “safer” learning environment for anyone. If schools were serious about that they could install more lights on walkways and such.

Most of the other commentators are spot-on. When schools attempt to discipline people for anything that occurs off campus, they open up not only a legal can of worms (which, thankfully will invite litigation) but they are just begging to be (probably rightfully) accused of selective enforcement of their own rules (generating further litigation). Most (but not all) schools realize that they are ill-equipped simultaneous act as a giver of services and a disciplinary “authority” (complete with tribunals that satisfy the 5th amendment’s concepts of fundamental fairness) and try and keep their judicial functions to a bare minimum.

As it stands now schools can and do discipline and expel students that have been convicted of felonies (and can do so without retrying the underlying issue), and can discipline students for on-campus activity.

Larry, at 4:06 pm EDT on October 18, 2005

Matt, You still have not explained why university administrators are entitled to have access to arrest records of their students from any police department. While most police blotters are public record, you seem to state (without authority) that there universities have a “right” to demand (and get) information that is not available to the public, and then act upon it as if it were a foregone conclusion that the allegations contained in the reports are true. Perhaps if you could provide the statutes at issue here, the conversation might be a tad more productive.

Secondly, at state universities, policies in the “handbook” must, themselves, be constitutional. As such, they cannot deprive students of due process, which would include expulsion upon merely an arrest by a police officer. On top of that, these polices must comport with state laws, and a host of federal laws (which are generally unenforceable by the student, but can be enforced by the federal government). Unfortunately, too many well-meaning policies in handbooks (and I don’t think this one is even well-meaning) become unenforceable when they impose too much of a burden on a student’s rights. (And just so you know, I have no objection to summary expulsion upon conviction of a crime, but arrests are different.)

Likewise, “community members” do not complain about lots of things – that doesn’t make it moral or constitutional. Indeed, since high school students are generally sheep, and even if they rebel, they can’t vote (and the ones that rebel are generally not athletes) I don’t see where your analogy between high schools and comes from, anyway. In my experience, community members blabbler on and on about “honor” until it is their kid that is the subject of a witch-hunt. Then it is all “rights” and “lawyers.” If it is someone else’s kid, you can talk about “honor.” (As for me, I consider many things to be “dishonorable” such as talking about court cases or statutes without reading them, but not everyone agrees with me on this.”)

Personally, I am against drinking and a tea-totaler. I don’t personally like students that drink. But, I realize that my values are not nearly as important as keeping administrators and law enforcement out of these adult’s private lives.

I should also note that law enforcement officers (that is – police and prosecutors) have well-defined jurisdictions: they know what laws they can enforce and where they can enforce them. No such limitations exist here. For that reason, only a certain class of people will be subject to scrutiny for their on-campus activities: those who run afoul of people like you who think that you can run peoples’ lives. I sincerely hope that you enforce your personal preferences upon students in an arbitrary way, because it will make a great lawsuit.

Finally, as a policy matter, if schools want to encourage academic performance, they can do many other things: provide undergraduate research opportunities, get students involved in academic, discourse, etc. Being a baby-sitter won’t help.

Larry, at 1:00 pm EDT on October 19, 2005

P v. R no longer exists in American law

Lauren,

The Supreme Court has long since abandoned the “privilege v. rights” distinction in Goldberg v. Kelley. Once someone is admitted the a public university, the ability to continue staying there is protected by the 5th and 14th amendments. For some reason, people say this in highschool civics classes, but these days, once a government creates some sort of entitlement, it cannot be taken away without following, at a minimum, a procedure which is “fundamentally fair.” Punishing people merely for being arrested is not fundamentally fair.

While parents might have an interest in making sure that their spoiled brats do well in school, the students are adults and are responsible for their own behavior. (And even if they were children, they would be, too.) Likewise, parents do not have a right to spy on their kids any more than a school does.

Of course it is nice to talk about “balancing rights v. safety” but this is nothing more than a thinly-veiled attempt to spy on students, and is (probably) illegal, anyway. Heck, I can justify anything by saying it is “balancing” “rights” against “safety.” But, as a legal matter, such balancing must be done on a case by case basis.

I appreciate you effort to make schools safer. Perhaps if we reduced the number of students that were likely to get into trouble (e.g. the jocks, fratboys) and made academics take up a greater part of students lives. Unfortunately, most of the “student life” people are more interested in preaching about how to live one’s private life or organizing parties.

Larry, at 5:57 pm EDT on October 19, 2005