The University Senate Wednesday affirmed the need to protect the privacy of student records and to scale back the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act.
The Senate voted to adopt a policy statement on the subpoena of student records that instructed faculty and staff members not to comply unquestioningly with law enforcement requests for information.
“While privacy issues are governed by both state and federal law, the University’s interest in privacy goes far beyond its commitment to comply with law,” the statement declared. “Privacy is an integral part of the academic freedom that is at the heart of the function of the modern university. Students, faculty and staff should be aware that the University supports their freedom to inquire, discuss and experiment with ideas without fear of improper government intrusion or public exposure.”
The policy statement states that all outside requests for information and student records should be examined by the University General Counsel’s office before the information is disclosed, and in no case should any disclosure proceed without the authorization of the University.
The University Senate also voted to petition the Oregon congressional delegation to seek revisions of the USA PATRIOT Act to eliminate what senators labeled liberty-restricting provisions.
Gordon Lafer, a professor with the University’s Labor Education and Research Center, submitted the petition, which states, “The University of Oregon University Senate calls upon the Oregon Congressional Delegation to promote the First Amendment rights, privacy rights and traditional civil, intellectual, academic and political liberties of the University Community by seeking appropriate revision of those sections of the PATRIOT Act and other related Orders of provisions of law that impose unjustifiable burdens on these rights and liberties.”
The Senate approved the petition by a nearly unanimous vote.
Also during Wednesday’s meeting, members of the Student Conduct Code Committee presented the Senate with its first round of proposed revisions to the conduct code, which is being comprehensively revamped for the first time in several decades.
“The big change is jurisdiction,” Committee co-Chairman Jesse Harding said.
The current code gives the University off-campus jurisdiction to discipline students only if sexual assault or misconduct occurs. The revised code will expand jurisdiction to allow the University to discipline students through the conduct process for any act of physical violence or threat of violence against another student that causes a reasonable person fear of physical harm.
Director of Student Judicial Affairs Chris Loschiavo said this type of expansion of jurisdiction has worked on other campuses, and as far as he knows, the University has the legal authority to do this because there is no case law prohibiting it.
He added that the conduct process is intended to be educational rather than punitive, and will in no way take the place of criminal prosecution that occurs as a result of a student’s actions.
The committee also revised the code’s mission statement to encompass more of a community aspect, and it revised the section on the authority for student discipline.
The University Senate also voted to reduce the number of credits required for fulfillment of University group requirements from 16 to 15 credits.
University Undergraduate Council Chairwoman Deborah Baumgold said this change was needed “to smooth the path for students coming from community colleges to the University,” because classes at those colleges are usually worth three credits each rather than four. Baumgold said this leads to a problem when community college students come to the University because even though they took five courses at three credits each, they still would not meet the University group requirement for 16 credits, which a regular student could meet in only four classes.