On Nov. 21, 2025, the Faculty Senate adopted Resolution 209 by a vote of 80 Yes, 16 No, 15 Abstain.
Faculty became interested in writing a resolution on this subject after a number of graduate students were suspended on an “interim basis” without any due process for about a year for participating in demonstrations related to the Gaza War. Previously, a number of faculty had opposed the December 2020 transfer of jurisdiction over campus conduct from the University Assembly (UA) to Ryan Lombardi, Vice President of Student and Campus Life.
These faculty, who served on the UA Campus Codes Committee, continued to try to perform oversight and dialogue with Christina Liang, Director of the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards (OSCCS), but were shut out completely. Liang argued that only the Student Assembly (SA) and the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly (GPSA) should communicate with OSCCS. However, the Standing Student Codes and Procedures Review Committee was never staffed, and the SA and GPSA were denied their promised role in the annual review of Liang’s job performance.
As political pressure to reform the code and procedures that have been in effect since August 2021 became impossible to ignore, VP Lombardi proposed, this summer, a review committee consisting of six administrators as voting members and five other voting members hand-picked by Lombardi who were not administrators.
In response, on September 2, a group of Faculty Senators proposed a resolution that condemned the administration and the current code and procedures. That resolution went through several iterations until the final version was approved by the Faculty Senate in November.
Faculty Senate Resolution 209 found that “the temporary suspensions were not subject to review or appeal outside of a small set of Cornell administrators.” It also held that “reform of the Student Code of Conduct and Procedures is urgently needed and should only be considered in a fully democratic process involving elected representatives of all university constituencies.” It also advocated that any members on the review committee representing the central administration or OSCCS should be non-voting members. Unlike SA resolutions, Faculty Senate resolutions are not subject to veto by President Kotlikoff.
Meanwhile, the SA adopted its own Resolution 10, which found, “the administration’s failure to collaborate with the elected Assemblies is a betrayal of Cornell’s system of shared governance.” Resolution 10 also endorses that OSCCS, which oversees enforcement of the Student Code of Conduct, should be independent of the central administration”. Resolution 10 also called for Lombardi’s committee to be replaced with a committee “composed of three freely elected members from [the SA, GPSA and UA] revise the Student Code of Conduct, and that the revision be approved by each of these bodies.”
As an SA resolution, the SA Charter requires the University President to accept or veto Resolution 10 within 30 days. However, on November 21, the President’s Office announced that his response to Resolution 10 would be delayed.
The Employee Assembly on Oct. 15, passed Resolution 2, that criticized Lombardi’s committee for not having voting members representing the Employee Assembly. President Kotlikoff acknowledged the resolution on Dec. 10 claiming that the administrators on that committee should count as “staff” representatives.
Prof. Richard Bensel, History, who co-sponsored the resolution, told the Cornell Review, “Our job is not done. We still need to coordinate with the other assemblies, including the Campus Codes Committee of the University Assembly, in order to create an alternative to the committee unilaterally created by the central administration.”
Meanwhile, an undergraduate referendum on the questions of whether the Student Code should be replaced by a Campus Code of Conduct and whether the judicial system should operate independently of the central administration was up for a vote on December 12.
