The House of Delegates unanimously passed a bill yesterday that will, if ratified by the Senate, remove the state-imposed consequence of expulsion for hazing and allow individual universities and their student governments to apply a broad range of sanctions instead.
"I think it's a step in the right direction," Inter-Fraternity Council President Phil Trout said. "It's a very good thing. We want the students to be making the decisions."
The University Judiciary Committee initiated the new hazing bill last spring. UJC worked with University officials and other state colleges and universities to oppose the current law that mandates expulsion if a student is found guilty of hazing.
Del. David Albo, R-Fairfax, presented the bill to the House of Delegates.
The new law would allow "the restoration of some discretion on the part of UJC and the University to make the punishment fit the crime," said Madelyn Wessel, assistant to the vice president for student affairs.
"You can have anything from pinching to serious bodily injury" and the University has no choice but to expel the student under current law, said Nancy Rivers, University director of state governmental relations.
"We want to allow a range of University-imposed sanctions that fit the severity of the offense," she added.
If the bill passes the Senate, the UJC will gain the authority to examine the situation and determine an appropriate sanction in hazing trials, from oral admonition to expulsion.
"The judiciary always has a trial for guilt and a trial for sanctions" for cases other than hazing, UJC Chair Katie Graney said. "The whole point of a trial for sanctions is so we can hear everything about the case," examining severity and intention, among other factors.
Under the current law, which mandates expulsion, there can be no trial for sanction in a hazing case and the Commonwealth is "sort of tying our hands," she said.
There have been no hazing cases brought to UJC in the past two years.
Wessel speculated that including less severe punishments might alleviate the "underreporting and lack of participation" that is a concern with the current hazing law in Virginia.
"We want to make sure that the students feel they can report everything," Rivers said.
Trout agreed with this sentiment.
"People will be more willing to bring up cases," he said. "Before, the price was too high."
The bill which passed in the House yesterday also includes a definition of hazing, which is missing from the current legislation.
"There is no definition at all of hazing in the current state law," Wessel said. "Zero."
Rivers said this led to due process complaints for vagueness in some hazing convictions.
"A crime should be defined adequately in order for people to understand what is prohibited," Wessel said.
The House bill now goes on to Senate subcommittee. The Senate also has a version of the hazing bill that it is currently reviewing. In order for the bill to become law, both houses must agree on a single bill.
"We are working to make that happen," Wessel said.
Read More
Summer Language Institute sees record high enrollment in its 45th year
By Zach Minkin | 23 minutes agoFor the first time in its 45-year history, SLI is featuring both four week and eight week options, where it previously only offered an eight week program.
U.Va. Faculty Senate overwhelmingly adopts a no confidence vote in Board of Visitors
By Xander Tilock | 2 days ago"The Faculty Senate expresses no confidence in the Board of Visitors for not protecting the University and its president from outside interference," the resolution read.
Faculty Senate Executives hear from Rector Sheridan and Vice Rector Wilkinson
By Xander Tilock and Grace Traxler | 3 days agoRectors were in attendance for part of Wednesday’s emergency meeting and were asked about the interim president selection process.
