Judicial Administrator Hopes Outsourcing 6.4 Cases Will Expedite Process

Editor’s note: This is the second part of a two-part series examining the Cornell disciplinary system. For the first part of the series, click here. When Interim Judicial Administrator Jody Kunk-Czaplicki gets a referral, she said her office first performs a basic, brightline analysis to determine whether the alleged misconduct falls under the purview of University codes. If the office decides it does, administrators launch an investigation. During this stage, multiple witnesses with competing testimony and unclear pieces of evidence can sometimes make it difficult to resolve the issue.

Judicial Administrator Office Slammed in Report

Editor’s Note: This is the first part of a two-part series examining the Cornell disciplinary system. For the second part of the series, click here. Over the past decade, the number of temporary suspensions used in Judicial Administrator investigations has increased by 350 percent, the number of suspensions on the merits of a case has increased by 333 percent and the number of expulsions has increased seven-fold. However, the number of referrals sent to the Office of the J.A. in the academic year 2013-14 was very similar to the number sent 10 years prior, rising only slightly from 812 in 2004 to 862 in 2014. While the J.A. attributes these trends to an increase in serious cases, the law students tasked with representing students in J.A. proceedings, known as Judicial Codes Counselors, contend that recent developments in the University’s disciplinary practices merit attention.