Monday’s story about the honor referendum (“Honor Committee validates proposal for spring elections,” 2/9/09) put forward by Hoos Against the Single Sanction (HASS) is deeply troubling. Of all the organizations at the University, students should ask the Honor Committee to be the most faithful in interpreting its governing documents. Instead, HASS asked for a free pass to ignore the honor constitution.
A clear reading of the honor constitution’s amendment language indicates that adequate petition signatures must be collected to create a proposal. That proposal must be received by the committee two weeks before the election.
This provision was unquestionably not fulfilled. I would like to know why HASS, the University Board of Elections, and a handful of committee members think this rule should not apply to this referendum.
The committee does not operate in a vacuum. The political pressure of a few squeaky wheels in HAAS and the threat of “bad press” likely forced the committee’s hand.
It is a shame that HAAS has to bend the rules to get this referendum on the ballot. No change to the honor constitution, especially one of this magnitude, should be advanced with this cloud of dubious constitutionality.
I am voting no to the referendum because of the lunacy of what it proposes: requiring the committee to fully investigate, try, and punish every trivial infringement and white lie. Now, I am also voting no, because I think this laughable proposal should never have made it onto the ballot in the first place.
Seth Brostoff
LAW III
Read More
TURNER: The ‘95-5’ statistic on viewpoints diversity leaves out the majority
By Sarah Turner | June 19, 2025Political contributions are likely a weak proxy for the presence of diverse perspectives in the classroom environment.
VEGA: In defense of President Jim Ryan
By Keoni Vega | June 5, 2025Should the raucous Jefferson Council and related conservative groups succeed in their effort to oust President Ryan, the University will enter a new phase that will be unrecognizable to most of its current students and staff.
GILLIKIN and JOHNSON: U.Va., please rescind your Federal Executive Institute bid
By Steven L. Johnson and Matthew Gillikin | April 29, 2025By withdrawing its competing bid and endorsing the Charlottesville City Schools’ bid, the University has a high-profile opportunity to strengthen its partnership with Charlottesville City Schools.
