U-M regents changed rules for campus complaints in just 40 seconds, with no discussion
Under the cover of summer break, while most students and staff were away from campus, the University of Michigan Board of Regents, along with President Santa Ono, implemented drastic amendments to the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities.
These alterations to the student handbook directly weaken students’ civil rights, while simultaneously widening the board’s authority to unilaterally accuse and punish the campus community. The changes concentrate power over a non-academic disciplinary process that can result in suspension or expulsion, in the hands of the administration, offering students little recourse if justice isn’t served.
The Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities is an agreement between students and the administration that describes expectations for students’ behavior, and a process for rectifying non-academic misconduct. When revising such a significant document, it is common practice to collaborate with students, faculty, staff, general counsel and other interest groups. The procedure is typically met with consultation, engagement, debate and scrutiny prior to revision.
But these amendments were unanimously approved by the Board of Regents with little awareness, discussion or input from the campus community. In less than 40 seconds during the July 18 public meeting, the board approved the motion unanimously.
Even the Faculty Senate was taken by surprise, the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs wrote in an Aug. 20 email to the senate's 7,300 members: “These new policies were adopted without input or advice from faculty, staff or students."
Among the most concerning revisions:
The board voted to codify what it says was the university’s implicit right to act as a complainant itself, even if an individual is not willing to file a complaint. The university says this is to protect members of the campus community who may feel intimidated. These changes came just a month after the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university had created a hostile environment on campus by investigating just one of 75 reported complaints made during protests related to the Israel-Hamas war.
New deadlines have been implemented throughout the disciplinary process. The entire complaint resolution process must conclude within 45 days, and any student has just five days to meet with administration after a complaint is filed – a slim window to enlist representation, and to establish an effective defense.
A single administrator – the Vice President for Student Life or their designee – has unilateral authority over all appeals, and their decision is final. Before the amendments were adopted, appeals were brought to a three-person review board composed of student, faculty and administration representatives. This significant change to appeals puts nearly every part of the complaint process in the administration’s control. This revision eliminates necessary checks and balances on administrative power, and removes student oversight in a process that directly impacts students.
More power for the administration, at students' expense
These amendments to the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities, especially in the manner they were made, positions the administration as the sole authority at every level of the student disciplinary processes.
With these changes, it will be easy for administration to bring charges against students, difficult for students to defend themselves; the proceedings will be conducted within a tight timeframe, and nearly impossible to appeal, as that process is now solely up to the discretion of a single designated administrator.
Section 8.J. of the statement itself outlines the traditional amendment process, which takes place every three years, after extensive collaboration and consultation, and normally during the school year, to allow for input regarding a document that directly and immediately impacts the campus community. The Faculty Senate committee members outlined in their letter how this process transpires, and how these amendments were atypically passed: “These changes were made without consulting faculty government representatives.”
Not UM values
Shortly after he became president of the University of Michigan, Santa Ono outlined the core Michigan values: integrity, respect, inclusion, equity, diversity and innovation.
Modifying the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities in this way undermines and dismisses every single one of the Michigan values that we, as proud Wolverines, promote on and beyond campus. The administration has apparently discarded the principle of shared governance by allowing administrators to alter due process without meaningful insight from those the policies affect. The administration has declared itself the complainant, prosecutor, judge, jury and punisher.
This sweeping policy shift sets a hostile tone, and sets a reckless precedent, which allows for future violations of student autonomy and due process.
As students, faculty, staff, alumni, parents, donors and community members share pride in our university, we also share an obligation to be outraged by this erosion of student rights and due process.
Students should organize and vocalize in favor of ethical policy and due process practices that include them, rather than giving the administration unilateral authority.
Faculty has a responsibility in shared governance to protect academic freedom and student rights against administrative overreach.
Alumni, parents and donors should make their support conditional upon the upholding of student autonomy and transparent governance.
The Board of Regents and President Ono must commit to following equitable procedures rather than codifying power grabs.
The reputation of the University of Michigan is rooted in academic freedom, autonomy, scholarship, justice, and empowerment. It is a reputation we collectively carry to every corner of society — a reputation that makes us the best. As Wolverines, it is our duty to hold our administrators accountable for now and future generations.
Hind Omar is a University of Michigan alumni and a freelance political strategist.
This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: University of Michigan's new disciplinary process tougher on students
