The lead editorial Feb. 7 ("For serious") described the honor trial standard of seriousness as "if 'open toleration of such an act impairs the community of trust enough to warrant permanent dismissal from the University.'" While that phrasing is sometimes cited, that is not how the standard is written in the Honor bylaws, which read, "An act is considered to be serious if open tolerance thereof would be inconsistent with the community of trust"
Read More
TAYLOR: The slush fund’s defeat is a reminder that our damaged institutions still function
By Nat Taylor | 2 days agoIt is worth celebrating this momentary triumph, if only to inspire confidence in our democracy again.
CARON: Legal does not mean accessible for reproductive rights in Virginia
By Jenna Caron | 2 days agoVirginians must affirm the VRRFA by voting it into the Constitution of Virginia and encourage their representatives to pursue consistent accessibility.
COHEN: The Honor Committee should rethink its approach to punishment
By Ryan Cohen | 5 days agoIf accountability is to remain at the heart of honor, then consequences must do more than educate — they must also reflect the seriousness of the violations committed.
