Bylaws to Charter
The bylaws to the Student Judicial Charter of 1997 are rules and/or administrative provisions of the Board on Judicial Affairs (BJA) that clarify and facilitate practice under the Charter and allow for efficient internal governance of the BJA. These apply for cases in progress as of May 1, 2023.
Under the Student Conduct Charter of 2023, the Board on Conduct Affairs has elected to retain many of these bylaws, with interpretations to update the textual references to align with the new Charter, as noted below. These continue to be in force for cases filed May 2, 2023 and thereafter.
To read historical Bylaws that have been superseded, please see the Historical Bylaws to the Charter.
Table of Contents
- Fundamental Rights/Rights of the Responding Student and the Reporting Party/Role of the Personal Adviser (retained in 2023)
- Rights of the Responding Student/Evidence that can be considered even when cross-examination is not possible (retained in 2023)
- Judicial Procedures/Powers of the Judicial Board/Student Conduct Penalty Code (retained in 2023 until passage of a new Penalty Code)
- Judicial Procedures/Board of Judicial Affairs/Procedures of the Board
- Judicial Procedures/Procedural Overview/Courtesy, Nonharassment, and Relevance (retained in 2023)
- Final Appeals/Compelling New Evidence (retained in 2023)
- Final Appeals/Denial of an Appeal Clarification Bylaw (retained in 2023)
- Fundamental Rights/Rights of Responding Student/Calling Witnesses (retained in 2023)
- Fundamental Rights/Cooperation of All Parties (retained in 2023)
- Fundamental Rights/Rights of the Responding Student/Confidentiality (retained in 2023)
- Charging Standard Bylaw
- Record Retention Policy Bylaw
The Charter does not include a definition of terms or outline all of the operational procedures by which it is to be implemented. The Judicial Officer [Conduct Investigator] and the Judicial Advisor [Conduct Advisor] inform and ask guidance from the Board on Judicial Affairs [Board on Conduct Affairs], usually with respect to questions raised by students and/or reporting parties about operating procedures. In response, the Board has issued the following bylaws:
Fundamental Rights/Rights of the Responding Student and the Reporting Party/Role of the Personal Adviser
The Judicial Charter, Sec. II.A.7 [Conduct Charter, Sec. V.A.3], provides that the responding student has the right:
- To have a person of their choice accompany them throughout the investigative and adjudicative process. This individual may assist the responding student during judicial procedures. The Board on Judicial Affairs [Board on Conduct Affairs] shall have the power to enact bylaws establishing policies and guidelines specifying the nature of the adviser's role.
The Judicial Charter, Sec. II.B.8 [Conduct Charter, Sec. V.A.3], also provides that the reporting party has the right:
- To have a person of their choice accompany them throughout the investigative and adjudicative process. The individual may provide advice and counsel, but may not speak on behalf of, or otherwise represent the reporting party during judicial procedures.
The Board has adopted the following bylaw to clarify the roles of advisers to the responding student and to the reporting witness:
- The responding student and the reporting party are expected to speak for themselves at hearings. Both the responding student and the reporting party are entitled to personal advisers, who may assist them throughout all proceedings and who may accompany them at all hearings. During any hearing, the personal advisers of both reporting party and responding student must limit their participation to private advice to the person they accompany.
(Adopted Spring 1998)
Rights of the Responding Student/Evidence that can be considered even when cross-examination is not possible
Under Sec II.A.15 of the Charter [Conduct Charter, Secs. IV.C.5, IV.C.6.b, and V.B.7], the Rights of the Responding Student include the following:
- To call witness on their behalf at Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] hearings and to cross-examine witnesses against them. The Board on Judicial Affairs [Board on Conduct Affairs] shall have the power to specify in its bylaws limited types of evidence that shall be considered admissible without cross-examination. In all other cases, evidence provided by a witness who is unwilling or unable to be cross-examined will be disregarded.
The Board has adopted a bylaw clarifying the types of evidence that can be considered without cross-examination:
- Types of evidence that shall be considered admissible without cross-examination include, for example: official records, reports, or data compilations by Stanford University offices, other educational institutions, or public agencies; final factual or legal rulings in any civil or criminal court; medical or related records in official clinic, hospital, or office files; or regularly compiled business or financial records.
(Adopted Spring 1998)
The Judicial Charter, Sec.IIIA.2(d), provides:
- The Board has the authority to adopt and/or modify the Student Conduct Penalty Code.
After a thorough study of the Penalty Code and after considering the recommendations of the Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel], the Board determined that its first penalty-related priority was to modify the Penalty Code to reflect current practice and to provide Judicial Panels [Conduct Panels] with some flexibility with respect to probationary penalties. Next year the Board will develop some guidelines for applying penalties in particular cases and for publicizing to the community the kind of penalty applied to different cases involving different kinds of misconduct. This document attempts neither of those tasks. It is merely a list and definition of penalties available to Judicial Boards.
(Adopted Spring 1998)
The Judicial Charter, Sec III.A.3, provides the following Procedures for the Board:
(b) Actions by the Board shall require a majority vote of those present and voting.
(c) The Board shall have the power to adopt rules of procedure to govern its own actions, provided that a two-thirds majority of those present and voting agree.
By consensus, the Board adopted the following bylaw to govern its internal decision making:
- The Board will form subcommittees as needed to make recommendations to the Board. Subcommittees will attempt to reach a consensus, but may offer as many "minority reports" as necessary to reflect the view of their members. The Board will promulgate bylaws by consensus where possible, and by voting where not. The Charter requires that the Board have a quorum for votes, a majority for substantive decisions, and a thirds majority for decisions on procedures governing the Board's own actions.
(Adopted Spring 1998)
The Judicial Charter, Section III.I.9 [Conduct Charter, Secs. IV.B.2 and IV.C.6], provides the following:
- Presentation of evidence and testimony, as well as, questioning of the responding student and of witnesses at Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] hearings shall be conducted in a manner that is courteous to all participants, that is devoid of intimidation and harassment, and that limits discussion to information relevant to the facts and issues of the case.
The Board has adopted a bylaw to facilitate enforcement of this provision:
- The Chair of the Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] has the duty to ensure that participants in the hearing act with courtesy and civility and avoid any intimidation or harassment.
(Adopted Spring 1998)
Pursuant to the Judicial Charter, Section III.H.1.b [Conduct Charter, Sec. IV.D.2.a]:
- NEW EVIDENCE means evidence that the Final Appeals Panel [Appeals Panel] determines was not available to the student or not known or reasonably discoverable by the student at the time of the Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] hearing. (That is, evidence does not become new at the appeals level if the student could have but did not – for whatever reason – present it to the Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel].)
- COMPELLING NEW EVIDENCE means evidence that the Final Appeals Panel [Appeals Panel] determines is not only NEW but also evidence that likely would have changed the Judicial Panel’s [Conduct Panel's] decision(s).
(Adopted Fall 2002)
Section III.H.1 of the Student Judicial Charter of 1997 [Conduct Charter, Sec. IV.D.2] sets forth the bases for appeal of a judicial panel’s [conduct panel's] finding of responsibility. The bases for appeal are:
- Demonstration of a significant procedural error.
- The availability of compelling new evidence.
- Demonstration of bias on the part of a member of any Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] involved in the case,
- Misconduct on the part of the Judicial Officer [Conduct Investigator] or the Judicial Advisor [Conduct Advisor], or
- Demonstration that any rights of the responding student enumerated in this Charter have been violated
Section III.H.3 of the Student Judicial Charter of 1997 [Conduct Charter, Sec. IV.D.5] sets forth the powers of the Final Appeals Panel [Appeals Panel]. The powers are:
- To deny the appeal.
- To return the case to the original Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel].
- To convene a new Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] to rehear the case.
- To reduce the sanctions.
- To dismiss the original charges.
The Final Appeals Panel [Appeals Panel] has the power to deny an appeal when:
- The Final Appeals Panel [Appeals Panel] finds that the appealing student has not demonstrated any basis for appeal as required by Section III.H.1 [Conduct Charter, Sec. IV.D.2]; or,
- Although the Final Appeals Panel [Appeals Panel] finds that the appealing student has demonstrated a basis (or bases) for appeal as required by Section III.H.1 [Conduct Charter, Sec. IV.D.2], it was (they were) unlikely to have had an effect on the decision of the Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel].
The Judicial Charter, Sec. II.A.15 [Conduct Charter, Secs. IV.C.5, IV.C.6.b, and V.B.7], provides that the responding student has the right:
- To call witnesses on their behalf at Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] hearings and to cross-examine witnesses against them. The Board on Judicial Affairs [Board on Conduct Affairs] shall have the power to specify in its bylaws limited types of evidence that shall be considered admissible without cross-examination. In all other cases, evidence provided by a witness who is unwilling or unable to be cross-examined will be disregarded.
As explained in Section I.9 of the Procedural Overview [Conduct Charter, Secs. IV.B.2 and IV.C.6], the hearing must be limited to “information relevant to the facts and issues of the case.” To ensure that hearings operate in this manner, the Board has adopted the following provision:
- Witnesses must be able to provide information that is relevant to the case. All witnesses must submit statements to the Office of Judicial Affairs [Office of Community Standards] in a timely fashion, as determined by the Judicial Officer [Conduct Investigator], prior to the start of the hearing. The hearing panel shall be the arbiter as to whether a witness meets these criteria, and if approved, shall have the power to limit witness testimony if it strays beyond, or does not add substantially to, the facts and issues of the case.
(Adopted Spring 2003)
The Judicial Charter, Section II.D [Conduct Charter, Sec. V.D], provides:
- Both the reporting party and the responding student are expected to cooperate fully with an investigation of the facts of a case and with the adjudicative process. Similarly, in keeping with the principles set forth in the Honor Code and Fundamental Standard, all parties with knowledge of facts pertaining to a case of alleged student misconduct are expected to cooperate fully with the investigation of the facts of the case and must appear, if requested, at Judicial Panel [Conduct Panel] hearings. In addition, all parties are expected to be respectful of the confidential nature of any knowledge or information they may have about a judicial case or the other parties involved. No person shall be required to engage in self-incrimination as part of any judicial proceeding.
The Board on Judicial Affairs [Board on Conduct Affairs] is aware of cases in which responding students or other student witnesses have refused to participate in the judicial process, or even acknowledge or respond to notices and communications from the Office of Judicial Affairs [Office of Community Standards], or to timely observe deadlines. Therefore, the Board adopts the following bylaw to amplify the meaning of the Charter provision regarding cooperation of all parties:
- Students who fail to cooperate in the adjudicative process may be subject to a Fundamental Standard charge and/or, in appropriate cases, non-cooperation may be considered an aggravating factor, except in respect of the exercise of their fundamental right to refuse to engage in self-incrimination. Non-student witnesses who fail to cooperate may be referred to authorities with appropriate jurisdiction.
(Adopted Spring 2003)
The confidentiality afforded to students under the Student Judicial Process balances students’ right to privacy; the need to promote the health, well-being, and safety of those students and the campus community as a whole; and the integrity of the judicial process.
The Office of Community Standards (OCS) will take appropriate steps to connect responding students to University support resources. To encourage students to speak candidly with support personnel, conversations between students and the OCS-referred University support personnel may not be used in Stanford judicial proceedings, except: (1) if those conversations are introduced as evidence by the responding student; (2) if it is necessary for the health or safety of the Stanford community; or (3) if required by law. OCS shall inform students and support personnel of these privacy rules.
In all circumstances, OCS will disclose the minimum information reasonably necessary to fulfill the objectives of the disclosure and will convey the sensitive nature of the information. Outside of the exceptions outlined below, OCS will not release any information from a student’s educational or disciplinary record.
Any student may give OCS express permission to:
- Communicate with other University offices requested by the student.
- Speak about OCS cases to which the student is a party with the student’s identified support person or people.
- Provide a Dean’s Certification, letter of clearance, college report, or similar verifications of a disciplinary record to an entity indicated by the student.
- Disclose information or release documents to recipients of a student’s choosing.
Additionally, OCS may disclose relevant information from a student’s educational or disciplinary record under the following circumstances:
- If necessary for the University to fulfill its responsibility to provide a safe environment for all students and the University community, OCS may disclose information about a student to relevant University personnel. Such disclosures must be limited to those who “need to know” in order to fulfill the aforementioned responsibility. Information shared this way will be protected in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and other applicable laws. OCS shall keep records of disclosures made under this provision.
- OCS may communicate with witnesses or potential witnesses as part of the judicial process, or with relevant University offices in the implementation of sanctions, or to confirm or refute information provided by a student to other University offices.
- In order to prepare aggregate and statistical reports, OCS may share information with IR&DS, provided IR&DS does not release individually identifiable information. The BJA shall approve all such disclosures in advance.
- OCS must disclose information when required by law.
(Adopted Winter 2023)
The Office of Community Standards shall use the following charging standard in all cases except those proceeding through the Alternate Review Process: “The Judicial Officer shall determine that there is sufficient evidence to file formal charges when s/he concludes that a fair-minded panelist could find the allegation(s) to be true beyond a reasonable doubt.” Panelists shall not construe the Judicial Officer’s charging decision as a finding of responsibility.
(Adopted Spring 2015)
The Office of Community Standards (OCS) shall maintain permanent confidential files on cases that are found by the Student Title IX Process, the previous Alternate Review Process (ARP) Reviewers, or a Judicial Panel to constitute a violation. Beginning with Academic Year 2017-2018, the OCS shall maintain confidential files for all cases resolved by the Early Resolution Option (ERO) for only seven years, provided the responsible student commits no subsequent violation.
Rational: This policy is consistent with the retention policies of Stanford’s peer institutions, and has been reviewed by the Office of General Counsel.
(Adopted Spring 2017)