Student Bill of Rights not binding; Senate, students express concern

Trista Turley

Managing Editor

The William Jewell College Student Handbook contains some of the most important information relevant to student life, ranging from the location and hours of key campus services to the recently instituted Honor Code. Included in the Handbook is the Student Bill of Rights. In six sections, the bill outlines the rights that students may expect to enjoy without interference from the administration, faculty or Board of Trustees. These rights include the freedom of expression, freedom from discrimination and the right to receive a degree upon fulfilling the College's graduation requirements.

Recently, a group of students learned that the Student Bill of Rights is not a binding College policy. The administration, faculty and Board of Trustees are not legally obligated to abide by it, according to T. Andrew Smith, sophomore and secretary and treasurer of Straights and Gays for Equality.

Smith found out that the Student Bill of Rights is not binding College policy when he attempted to petition Ernie Stuffl ebean, assistant dean of students and director of Residential Life, to institute a gender-neutral housing policy on campus.

"The argument of my proposal says that because the Student Bill of Rights says that (the College) cannot discriminate on the basis of sex or sexual orientation, they should at least off er the option for housing where you can room with anyone of any gender if you want to," Smith said. "(Stufflebean) told me that is not how the Student Bill of Rights worked."

According to Smith, Stufflebean explained that the Student Bill of Rights has not been ratified by the College's Board of Trustees, and is therefore not binding College policy. The document is merely an expression of the philosophy of the Student Senate and student body and functions as a set of guidelines.

Dr. Rick Winslow, vice-president for enrollment and student aff airs, confirmed this information. "(The Student Bill of Rights) is not a legally binding document that binds the Board of Trustees or the College administration to the specific language," Winslow said. "It is a framework or a set of guidelines that informs the administration as it creates policy or amends or changes policy. 

Over (the bill's) 40 or so years of existence, I think the College has done a very good job of creating policies or amending policies consistent with the intent of the Bill of Rights."

Student Senate ratifi ed the Student Bill of Rights in 1977. While the faculty, administration and Board of Trustees voted to recognize the bill, the Board never offi cially adopted the bill as College policy. Yet many students are unaware that the bill is not binding upon College offi cials. 

Until recently, these students included the Student Senate cabinet. "We were not aware of the fact that (the bill) was not the policy of the College," Tori Odell, senior and president of Student Senate, said. "It was actually (Smith) and Adam (Al Douri, junior and president of SAGE) who, about two weeks ago, brought it to my attention."

Smith believes that the confusion in the nature and purpose of the Bill of Rights can be attributed to the vagueness of the language in the bill as well as the student handbook. Section six of the bill reads, in part, "The Bill of Rights shall be recognized by the faculty, administration, and Board of Trustees as the students' expectations of all members of the William Jewell College community."

Winslow agreed that the language of the handbook was unclear. 

"I can see how, because (the Bill of Rights) exists in writing within the student handbook, students might believe it is a legally binding document," he said. "I think it is fair for students to request that be clarified." Earlier this week, the College administration amended the portion of the handbook concerned with the Student Bill of Rights to read, in part, "The Student Bill of Rights sets forth expectations developed by Student Senate and are not ratified by the College's administration or Board of Trustees as College policy."

For some students, this clarification is not sufficient. Last week, Student Senate established a Student Bill of Rights task force. The task force consists of both senators and non-senators and is charged with drafting a proposal to have a Bill of Rights ratifi ed by the Board of Trustees as binding College policy by the end of the 2010-2011 academic year. Odell anticipates the task force will function similarly to the Student Senate task force responsible for drafting the College's alcohol policy two years ago.

Winslow said he is not sure how the Board of Trustees will react to the proposal, but insists that, while the Student Bill of Rights is not College policy, no current practices of the policies or administration contradict the spirit of the bill. "I don't think there are any examples of the College not adhering to the intent of the language," he said. "I don't think there's any behavior from the administration or Board of Trustees that indicates that they will veer away from making sure the document is honored."

Odell indicated that Student Senate may hold a town meeting in the near future regarding the status of the Student Bill of Rights, and encourages the student body to actively express any concerns. 

Trista Turley can be reached at  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.