What are my rights in the discipline process?
 

As a student, your rights to due process beyond the text of the discipline policy at the University of Rochester are rather limited. If the University were a public institution, students would have some rights guaranteed to them under the Constitutions of the United States and the State of New York. But because the University is a private actor, due process rights are based almost solely instead on the contractual obligation of the University to follow its own discipline policies. Courts have ruled that "an educational institution's brochures, policy manuals and other advertisements may form the basis of a legally cognizable contractual relationship between the institution and its students" [see Bittle, below].

This remains a gray area. The Supreme Court and lower courts have continued to move toward extending more rights to students, including imposing 'notice and hearing' requirements on (non-state actor) private schools [Hill v. McCauley, 3 Pa. County Ct. 77 (1887)] to make discipline processes fairer. Higher education literature therefore counsels private universities to adopt written disciplinary codes and extend rights beyond those required by case law.

Students at the University of Rochester are afforded several rights under the "fundamental fairness" section of the University discipline policy available here. Student rights are limited to those listed in this section, and to the fact that the University must follow its policies as a contractual obligation.

The industry standard for due process includes the following rights (from NASPA Journal 33 (1996):122:

• notice of the charge, including sufficient detail to inform the student about the nature and facts of the incident
• notice of who will present information at the hearing
• reasonable notice of the hearing (including one continuance for good cause, at the request of the student)
• a copy of any established procedures
• to have an individual hearing if more than one student is charged
• to be present at the hearing
• to face the accuser
• to be heard and to present information
• to an advisor
• to question all those presenting information
• to call on others to present information
• to remain silent
• to an impartial decision
• to timely notice of the decision
• to a record of the proceedings
• to appeal

If you compare the University's scheme with that of the recommended minimum standard, the University fares pretty well.

Recently, some students have suggested that if only the Students' Association Senate would pass a 'Students Bill of Rights,' students would be free from the terrorizing claw of the University discipline system. Such sentiment demonstrates either a profound misunderstanding or willful ignorance of the discipline system and the authority of the SA Senate. If students wish to change how discipline is handled at the University, we need to do it by lobbying the administration, something the new Constitution would facilitate. A bill of rights passed by the Students' Association would be meaningless.

The information on this page is provided as an advisory notice only, and is not sanctioned by the University nor part of University policy.

Relevant Cases

• Albert v. Carovano, 851 F.2d 561 (2d Cir. 1988)
• Miller v. Long Island University, 85 Misc. 2d 393, 380 N.Y.S.2d 917 (NY Sup Ct 1976)
• Bittle v. Oklahoma City University, 2000 OK CIV APP 66; 6 P.3d 509; 2000 Okla. Civ. App. LEXIS 22; 71 O.B.A.J. 1651

Note the information contained on these pages is for advisory purposes only;
for legal information please consult the Office of the Dean of Students.