The recent University Judiciary Committee charges filed against members of The Cavalier Daily managing board and taken to trial in the case of Editor-in-Chief Jason Ally were about an alleged breach of confidentiality in Honor Committee proceedings. Thus, readers might be curious about why so much attention has been devoted to the issue of the UJC's jurisdiction. The immediate reason is that the process by which the body determined it did not have jurisdiction in this case was fundamentally flawed since it did not involve UJC Chair Victoria Marchetti or her executive committee fulfilling their responsibility to rule on jurisdiction matters. Rather, this decision was deferred to a trial panel, which handed down a correct ruling that unfortunately will have no bearing on future cases since UJC trials do not operate on precedent.
More broadly, UJC jurisdiction is a significant issue because of its implications for the operation of a free press at the University. If The Cavalier Daily and other student-run media organizations are not exempt from the UJC's oversight, then it will be impossible for them to offer wholly transparent and objective reporting in the future. Therefore, the UJC executive committee must issue an opinion clarifying that these groups remain exempt from the body's jurisdiction and must refrain from proposing any constitutional amendments that would seek to erode this protection.
Already, the UJC's improper handling of the jurisdiction question presented in the case against the managing board has negatively impacted The Cavalier Daily's operations. First, the paper had to delay publication of content relating to the case while it sought legal counsel to reaffirm the paper's interpretation of the UJC's jurisdiction limits. Additionally, the paper remains unable to reveal the identities of the individuals who authored articles about the case while it was ongoing. The fact that the jurisdiction matter was not settled definitively means those writers could face UJC charges if their names are published, a step the paper generally would take to maintain transparency.
These problems would be exacerbated if the UJC were to propose a constitutional amendment eliminating the jurisdiction exemption for "journalistic and editorial functions by student groups." Without the jurisdiction exemption, the paper would be entirely vulnerable to charges filed against it for violating Standard of Conduct 11, which prohibits "intentional, reckless, or negligent conduct which obstructs the operations of the Honor or Judiciary Committee, or conduct that violates their rules of confidentiality." This would allow a member of either committee to interpret negative coverage as obstructing its operations and subsequently lodge Standard 11 charges against the paper. Opponents of the jurisdiction exemption cannot appeal to the implausibility of such a scenario to defend their position; after all, six weeks ago, it would have seemed unthinkable that the Honor Committee chair would file charges against The Cavalier Daily managing board for merely acknowledging in an editorial that it reported plagiarism incidents to the Committee.
Most of the other arguments made by those who assert that student-run media organizations should fall within the jurisdiction of the UJC are red herrings. Specifically, it cannot be claimed with regard to The Cavalier Daily that it should be held accountable to the UJC because the body hears cases involving alleged misconduct committed by other student groups. This is because the paper is financially and editorially independent of the University and operates as a non-profit corporation that is not bound by University policies.
Moreover, the individuals who comprise student media organizations already answer to U.S. civil and criminal courts. This means students and student groups can be sued for libel if they publish information about an individual that is damaging and patently false. Hence, the UJC's jurisdiction does not need to encompass student media organizations for them to be punished for irresponsible journalism.
Finally, the UJC cannot exercise jurisdiction with regard to student media organizations because, as has been evidenced in this controversy, it amounts to prior restraint and censorship. Although some have argued that this is acceptable to ensure that the individual students who work for these organizations are bound by University policy, it is unconstitutional for the University to promulgate policies that violate the First Amendment. Therefore, it is impossible for the UJC - or the administration - to claim that student media organizations are bound by the confidentiality rules of the Honor Committee and the UJC since those would place limitations upon the content that groups such as The Cavalier Daily can publish.
Although it is too late to redress the harm done to The Cavalier Daily's journalistic and editorial independence in this case, the UJC must respect the boundaries to its authority established in its own constitution and the U.S. Constitution. Otherwise, the University will cease to be a place where student journalists, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, "are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead," since doing so might lead them down the road to a trial date with the UJC.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 5 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
