Tuesday night, Student Council voted to approve the CIO status of DREAMers, an organization that represents undocumented students at the University. The vote came a week after Student Council refused to grant CIO status to DREAMers due to concerns about the organization and its CIO application. What followed was a flurry of impassioned responses from the group and its allies aimed at Student Council, including the circulation of a petition requesting, among other demands, a public apology from the organization. The controversy following this incident highlights the need for student groups to gather all information before issuing a response.
Per Student Council President Emily Lodge, the group’s initial denial is not an uncommon occurrence. Organizations seeking CIO status are sometimes denied before they re-apply with more complete applications. In fact, on Tuesday night Student Council approved a new CIO, Hope on Grounds, after initially denying CIO status to the organization due to concerns with the group’s application, which were later addressed by a founding member of the group. What happened to DREAMers was not out of the ordinary.
Many were upset with a Facebook post by Law School Representative Erich Reimer, which praised the “defeat” of the bill to approve DREAMers — and rightfully so. Reimer’s celebration was unacceptable; Student Council vote outcomes should never be personal, political victories for those who vote on behalf of the entire student population. However, there was no evidence that personal biases led other representatives to vote the way they did, as one of DREAMers’ allies suggested. It’s not fair to project Reimer’s inappropriate response onto the rest of Student Council. Additionally, for the petition to suggest that Student Council as a whole is xenophobic is unfair and an accusation that should not be made so prematurely.
Following controversy, student organizations and their leaders often have the expectation to issue an immediate response. This particular incident demonstrates the need for more measured responses by our peer organizations on Grounds. Before forming an opinion on this type of incident — especially when releasing a public statement accusing others of bias or of intentionally marginalizing others — students must be more patient and diligent in gathering details.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 14 hours agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoOur independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | April 17, 2024In addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
