Student Council is expected to vote tonight on a spring ballot referendum to add a provision for hate crimes sanctioning to the University Judicial Committee Standards of Conduct.
The referendum is a general question that asks students if they would support an amendment to the UJC Standards of Conduct that would allow for harsher sanctioning in cases motivated by "hate".
The referendum was proposed in response to recent racially-motivated incidents on Grounds.
"What we are trying to do is make the punishment more strict for those convicted of crimes motivated by hate," said Tom Gibson, one of the Student Council representatives who introduced the legislation.
The referendum is intended to gauge student opinion on the issue.
A hate crimes Standard would change the judicial process because judges would need to investigate motive during a Trial For Guilt, UJC Chair Angela Carrico said.
Currently, a Trial For Guilt only deals with the particular incident while a Trial For Sanction looks at other factors such as previous record, character and motive.
Although there is no specific mention of hate crimes in the Standards, UJC by-laws allow judges discretion, especially in exceptional cases.
"In the Trial For Sanction, judges always take motive into account," Carrico said.
Any change to the UJC Standards of Conduct requires the approval of the Board of Visitors.
The UJC Standards of Conduct was recently amended, with the Board's approval, in order to extend the jurisdiction of two of the Standards.
The hate crimes referendum was brought before the UJC at a meeting last Sunday, and the Committee has not yet had a chance to vote on it.
According to Carrico, some UJC members have questioned the need for a hate crimes amendment because other Standards already govern such conduct.
"The general sense I've gotten is that Standards shouldn't overlap," Carrico said.
The referendum can be placed on the ballot through a combination of a two-thirds majority of Council representatives and 25 signatures, a three-fourths majority of Council and no signatures, or a petition signed by around 900 students.
Gibson said he expects the Council vote to pass and the referendum to be placed on the spring ballot.
"The decision is ultimately up to the students," Gibson said.
Read More
Will the Faculty Senate’s no-confidence vote impact the U.Va. Board of Visitors?
By Brandon Kile | 2 hours agoIn many cases, a no-confidence vote may soon be followed by steps taken to remove the leadership that may be acting against the wishes of a community.
Two senior U.Va. Health leaders quietly take new jobs without formal announcement
By Ford McCracken | YesterdayKibbe’s departure marks the end of an ongoing battle between U.Va. Health employees and their senior leadership.
Letter from 12 deans to Board of Visitors goes unanswered for almost two weeks
By Naima Sawaya | YesterdayAt the time of publication, the academic deans had received no response from the Board regarding their offer to meet with the Board “as soon as possible.”
