By Aislinn Keely, Victor Ordonez, Theresa Schliep and Erin Shanahan

In response to Thursday’s protest, during which protestors attempted to enter Cunniffe House, the administration has taken disciplinary action on several students involved. As an interim measure, the administration told four students involved with the protest to leave campus on Friday, April 28 and not return until Sunday, April 30.

Christopher Rodgers, dean of students, notified 13 involved in the protest of interim measures on Friday evening. Disciplinary action varied by case, but action taken included removal from Spring Weekend activities, campus access restrictions and housing suspension.

Students may have received these disciplinary actions due to multiple reasons, according to Rodgers. Violation of the demonstration policy, organization of an illegal on campus demonstration, violence against staff members, unauthorized entry, or prior violations of the student handbook were cited by Rodgers as some potential reasons for disciplinary action.

According to Rodgers, this is inline with the University’s student conduct system.

An accused student shall be free from student conduct sanctions pending the conclusion of his or her hearing, except in cases of refusal or failure to appear or where the Dean of Students determines that the well-being including, but not limited to, the health and safety of the community or of the accused student is endangered by that student’s presence on campus. In these cases, the Dean of Students may take appropriate interim measures, including temporary suspension of the accused student.

The use of this section of the code of conduct in regards to the protestors at Cunniffee house was brought into question at today’s Student Life Council meeting.

“The implication that these student are a danger in general doesn’t make sense to me.” said Genevieve McNamara FCRH ’17. “I want to point out that at least one student who was banned was not even present at the altercation and was penalized solely based on his association with the students who were. I don’t see how you can reasonably deem him a danger to the health and safety of the community.”

The administration determined six of these 13 students’ actions justified the loss of housing as part of the interim measures, according to Rodgers. Upon reviewing the student’s address on record, the administration found that two of these six students lived too far to relocate in the time given. The administration found that the remaining four of those six students lived close enough to find alternative arrangements upon the suspension of housing for the weekend.

On Sunday, three of the four students resumed their on campus residency. The fourth student is out of housing pending the outcome of the conduct process, according to Rodgers.

Students involved said neither faculty, staff nor administrators took appropriate actions when enforcing the interim measures.

Sapphira Lurie, FCLC ’17, was one of the six students whose actions justified the loss of housing as part of the interim measures. The five other students have not come forward publicly to The Fordham Ram at this time.

However, Lurie was one of the two students who did not leave campus because of the distance between her home addresses on record and campus.

She said other students who were temporarily suspended from housing were not given sufficient time to leave their residences.

“Resident Directors showed up at their dorms and forced them to leave,” Lurie said. “Students were given roughly one hour’s notice to leave their residences.”

The Fordham Ram has reached out to Kimberly Russell, assistant dean of students and director of residential life however she has not responded at this time.

According to Rodgers, no students expressed any issue with departure.

“We would never simply send people away: staff were sent to work with the students as they departed the residence halls,” said Rodgers. “While all four students live close enough to campus to sleep at home, should anyone have needed more time, had trouble finding a place to stay, or requested assistance of our staff, we would of course help.”

An email to the Fordham community from the News and Media Relations Bureau said that

“the Office of Student Affairs confirmed that all of the students whose access to campus was limited over the weekend had family or friends to stay with.”

Upon further review, no office entitled “The Office of Student Affairs” exists at Fordham College Rose Hill, Fordham Gabelli School of Business or Fordham College Lincoln Center.

“I mentioned earlier,” Lurie said. “That they lied to make it seem as though they made sure students had a place to stay before they were ejected from their residences.”

Rebecca Erwin, FCRH ‘18, said at SLC today that her roommate’s experience did not align with Rodgers description of the departure process. She said that her roommate lived several hours upstate and had no way to get home to her parents.

“An RD did come up, not to discuss this, but just to tell them that they had to go,” said Erwin FCRH ‘18. “My roommate told him that they had nowhere to go and the RD had no response.”

As one of the four students, Lurie said she was indefinitely banned from the Rose Hill campus.

“I am also banned from the Lincoln Center campus for all activities except class, which I believe is a purposely vindictive measure against me,” said Lurie. “This has disrupted my ability to work on campus, which is the only way I can pay for food.”

A petition that circulated the community and social media said the actions taken by the administrations were “vindictive.” This petition was signed by approximately 1,400 students, faculty and alumni.

“These actions are, as far as we can tell, completely unprecedented anywhere in higher education,” said the petition. “Even the students at Middlebury, who are charged with assaulting security officers and a visiting speaker as well as of injuring a faculty member, are not facing anything like this.”

Rodgers said that these actions are common at our university.

“Interim measures such as being sent home for the weekend are standard in conduct processes after serious incidents like this. They were assigned here after careful collaborative review of available documentation in Student Life,” said Rodgers.

Rodgers, as well as an email sent from Fordham’s News and Media Relations Bureau, said Fordham has used such interim measures in the past.

“These measures are not frequently used, but are routine for the level of disciplinary charges the students will likely face, and are part of the university’s long-established policy,” it said.

The email cited that 11 students have been denied campus access prior to the outcome of conduct proceedings in the past year. This is inline with the University’s student conduct system.

The petition circulated around the Fordham community calls for McShane to overturn the measures put in place by Rodgers, which they feel is too strong regardless of the disputed events of Thursday’s incident at Cunniffe House.

“If there are grounds for disciplinary charges to be filed, we agree that a fair process to adjudicate these charges should begin promptly. But we hope you agree that it is highly inappropriate to enact sanctions before such processes even begin,” read the petition.

Lurie plans to continue vocalizing grievances despite the interim measures.

“Going forward, we will continue to put pressure on Fordham’s administration to honor the faculty and students who make up this community,” she said.
The conduct process will take place in the next week, according to a university-wide email from Fordham’s News and Media Bureau.