Flap at Princeton University over amendments to Honor System. It’s not students’ responsibility to protect the University from legal liability?

A letter to the Daily Princetonian titled Concerning amendments to the constitution of the Honor System discusses some procedural issues related to voted-upon amendments to Princeton's Constitution of the Honor System.As to Amendments 2-4, from a 10 Dec 2017 letter by Ling Ritter Princeton ’19 :The second referendum sponsored by the USG Subcommittee on the Honor Constitution establishes a minimum standard of “at least two separate pieces of evidence, each of which indicates that a violation occurred” necessary for the Honor Committee to put a student through a hearing. The opposition claims that this standard would force the Chair and investigators to make pre-hearing judgments on the strength of the evidence. Firstly, the Chair’s role of overseeing investigations means that he or she sees all the evidence collected in an investigation, even if some of that evidence doesn’t make it into the hearing room. Because of this role, it is…

Read more detail on Recent Intellectual Property Law posts –

Related news:

This entry was posted in Intellectual Property and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply