Christopher Benos '22
Guest Writer
Everyone deserves a second chance—this week, vote “Yes” for a fairer Honor System.
UVA’s Honor Code has remained largely unchanged for most of the University’s history. It is time for a change. On your ballot, beginning today, you will see a referendum that proposes to reduce the honor sanction from expulsion to a two-semester leave of absence. As the reform’s sponsor and campaign chair, I write to advocate for its merits and seek your support.
Expulsion comes at too great a cost[1] to students. It affects their health. It can be financially ruinous. And it strips students of their dignity, their community, and the chance at redemption. An expelled student is a friend, a neighbor, a colleague. Every person is worthy of a second chance.
Expulsion is plagued by broad concerns about equity and justice. There are legitimate, longstanding concerns about whether our Honor System is tainted by racism and other forms of bias. Though more work is desperately needed to address disparities, we can no longer support a sanction which allows the most severe outcome to fall disproportionately on some communities more than others.
Expulsion also fails the practical needs of our community by disincentivizing reporting and affecting juries. Nearly five percent of students—or roughly 1,250 students—admitted[2] in one survey to committing an honor offense. But Honor only receives[3] 40 to 60 cases a year, in part because expulsion strongly disincentivizes[4] reporting. In a recent report, nearly half[5] of students surveyed indicated that expulsion deterred them from reporting. Some suggest that one in five[6] faculty feels the same way. Underreporting means that the reality of expulsion, rather than holding students accountable, is a statistical game of chance rather than anything resembling an effective policy. Similarly, some jurors are hesitant to impose expulsion because of its severity. Juries may thus “nullify” verdicts, meaning that they acquit based on their views of expulsion rather than on the evidence, despite believing in a student’s guilt. Though data is not reliably available on the reasoning of Honor juries, nullification is a well-studied phenomenon. Some scholars note that jury nullification plays a particularly substantial role where punishment is especially severe, such as in capital punishment cases.[7] Lowering the penalty will eliminate many of the disincentives to reporting and allow juries to more fairly weigh evidence, two critical steps towards transforming the system from a hollow branding tool to a functional institution.
Doing nothing is not the answer—inaction is a privilege of those with means, power and status. Institutionalist critics claim[8] that they support alternative solutions because repealing expulsion destroys Honor by lowering our standards of conduct. Yet they fail to assemble a truly viable alternative. This reform is not a perfect proposal. No reform is. This reform does not solve every single serious challenge that Honor faces. No reform can. But doing nothing hurts students. Expulsion benefits no one.[9] Future students can and should pursue further reforms in the years to come. This reform must be a realistic first step.
A near supermajority of the current Honor Committee has publicly endorsed this reform and called on students to vote in favor. Your elected SBA also endorsed, nearly unanimously, the reform last fall. SBA President Niko Orfanedes expressed support, emphasizing that it favors students. “SBA supports student self-governance and initiatives aimed at improving the community. This proposal strongly favors students’ rights, allowing them to learn from their mistakes. Further, the severity of the current single-sanction system disincentivizes reporting honor violations and thereby hinders the system from fairly regulating student conduct as intended.”
We are all stewards of this University. As the Honor Committee’s own statements[10] note, students “are not passive recipients of culture, but rather are active agents in creating and maintaining the ideals of our community.” To change is not to destroy. Many of us have spent countless years fighting from within the Honor System. We care about this University and want to see it improve. But internal solutions and inaction have failed. It is time for a transformational change.
Our Community of Trust must be about so much more than expulsion. It must call on us to act with integrity while also asking us to show compassion and empathy for students who make mistakes. Students who commit honor offenses should face consequences. But expulsion is not the answer. We all must meet the moment. I hope you will join us in this fight for a fairer system by voting “Yes” on the referendum.
---
christopherbenos@virginia. edu
[1] https://report.honor.virginia.edu/succisa-virescit
[2] http://honor.virginia.edu/sites/honor.virginia.edu/files/2012-Student-Survey.pdf
[3] https://report.honor.virginia.edu/sites/report.honor/files/honor-bicentennial-analysis.pdf
[4]https://report.honor.virginia.edu/sites/report.honor/files/styles/2018_%20Honor%20Audit%20Commission%20Report_1.18.pdf
[5] Id.
[6] https://www.c-ville.com/honor-crimes-is-it-time-for-the-single-sanction-to-go
[7] https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/capital-jurors-in-an-era-of-death-penalty-decline
[8] https://www.lawweekly.org/front-page/2022/1/26/letter-to-the-editor-honor-committee-changes
[9] https://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2022/01/editorial-honor-enough-is-enough-its-time-to-act
[10] https://honor.virginia.edu/overview