Updates from the Rules Administrator

We have established this Office of Rules Administration webpage to provide relevant updates to the University community regarding the Rules Administrator's current interpretations of the Rules of University Conduct. The Administrator's postings on this page are viewpoint and content neutral and may be updated to reflect developments in facts or circumstances. This page is part of an ongoing effort of the Office of Rules Administration to provide our community with a clear understanding of the Rules of University Conduct and the processes under which they are applied. 

Posted at 1:25 p.m. on Monday, May 12, 2025

As we prepare for this year’s Class Day ceremonies and University Commencement, it is important to offer a general reminder about applicability of the Rules of University Conduct during these significant campus-wide events.

The Rules apply to all members of the Columbia community including students, faculty, and staff - as well as to visitors, licensees, and invitees (§442) while on University property or participating in University-sponsored functions. Commencement and Class Day activities are University functions as defined under §441.c of the Rules and are clearly governed by them.

These ceremonies represent the culmination of students’ academic achievements, and considerable effort has gone into ensuring they are celebratory, safe, and inclusive for all members of the University community, including families, guests, and other attendees. Disruptions to these events including, but not limited to, impeding access to event spaces, interrupting proceedings, or interfering with the rights of others to attend or participate may constitute violations under §443 of the Rules. As always, the Rules of University Conduct are content-neutral and focus solely on conduct.

University Delegates and Public Safety officers will be on site and may intervene if activity arises that may conflict with the provisions of the Rules. Members of the University community are reminded of their obligation to comply with Delegate directives pursuant to §443.a(16)-(20).

The University values the right to engage in free expression. At the same time, the Rules of University Conduct establish reasonable time, place, and manner parameters to ensure that such expression does not interfere with the rights of others to participate in University functions, including Commencement and Class Day activities. This approach ensures that all members of our community, along with their families and guests, are able to fully participate in and experience these milestone events without disruption.

The full text of the Rules of University Conduct is available here: https://universitypolicies.columbia.edu/content/rules-university-conduct

Posted at 9:11 a.m. on Friday, May 9, 2025

The Rules of University Conduct seek to balance protecting free expression and achievement of Columbia's academic mission. Disruptions to academic activities are in violation of the core principles of the Rules of University Conduct. 

Following the disruption at Butler Library on Wednesday, the University's Rules Administrator immediately began an investigation into Rules violations. Columbia participants have been placed on interim suspension pending further investigation. All individuals from affiliated institutions and non-affiliates who were identified as participating in the event have been barred from Columbia’s campus.

Posted at 3:50 p.m. on Friday, May 2, 2025

Clarifying the Role of Delegates Under the Rules of University Conduct

Community members have recently asked questions about when and how University Delegates are expected to engage. It is important to clarify that Delegates are empowered under the Rules of University Conduct to respond to activities specifically related to protests, demonstrations, rallies, or picketing that occur on or at a University facility or at any University sponsored activity. Their authority is limited to addressing conduct that may constitute a violation of the Rules during such activity.

Delegates are not charged with enforcing other University policies unrelated to protest activity - such as general prohibitions on recording - unless those actions occur in direct connection with a demonstration and may also constitute a violation of the Rules. In other contexts, such matters may fall under the jurisdiction of other relevant University policies.

Delegates act in a content-neutral manner and may provide warnings or request identification when they believe a violation of the Rules is occurring. When no such activity is present - and particularly when a situation is quickly deescalated through other appropriate channels, including Public Safety - Delegate intervention may not be necessary or appropriate.

Posted at 10:10 p.m. on Sunday, April 20, 2025

Please see this statement issued by Public Safety regarding chaining oneself (or similar) to University property or to objects on University property.

Posted at 12:05 p.m. on Wednesday, April 9, 2025

As we approach the anniversary of the encampments that took place on the South Lawn, it is helpful to try to offer some guidance on how the Rules of University Conduct (which can be viewed here) apply in relation to encampments, and interface with other policies. Please also see “Are encampments prohibited by the Rules of University Conduct” in the University Senate Rules Committee’s FAQ on Revisions to the Guidelines to the Rules of University Conduct. 

Under the University's Outdoor Space Policy, camping is not permitted on campus lawns or hardscapes and camping tents and/or smaller coverings meant for individual use is strictly prohibited. All tenting must be ordered through Columbia Facilities and may remain on lawns for no longer than 48 hours. Details of these policies are available here.

Under the Rules of University Conduct, erecting tents on a lawn as part of a demonstration or protest raises concerns about impeding use of the space, a serious violation under Section 443.a(8). Given that these spaces may be reserved for events sponsored by student groups or for University functions (e.g., Class Day ceremonies), placing tents on a lawn could also be viewed as disrupting University functions, violations which fall under 443.a(13) and (14). Providing notification of a protest of this nature does not mean it is approved by the University or able to proceed for the time indicated.  While there are reservable spaces at Columbia, they cannot be reserved for activities that on their face violate the Rules and the Outdoor Space Policy.

Because of safety concerns and the prohibitions outlined in the Outdoor Space Policy, the University may declare a lawn (as a "facility") or other location closed, which is consistent with the University's authority to regulate time, place, and manner of protests. Remaining in such a space once it has been declared closed would constitute a violation under 443.a(9).

The Rules also outline the role of University Delegates, who are responsible for identifying individuals perceived to be engaging in Rules violations and for issuing directions to assure unimpeded access to or use of a facility and, in some cases, issue orders to disperse from an assembly if there are repeated or continuing violations of Rules. Failure to comply with Delegate orders relate to violations under 443.a(16), (18), (19), and (20).

The Rules of University Conduct provide wide latitude for engaging in rights to protest and demonstrate, but also indicate, through violations enumerated in Section 443, limits to those rights. We have provided here a transparent explanation of how an encampment as a form of protest runs the risk of multiple simple and serious violations under the Rules of University Conduct, consistent with the FAQ produced by the Rules Committee.

Posted at 3:00 p.m. on Monday, April 7, 2025

Recent events on Barnard's campus have raised the question of whether or not the Rules of University Conduct apply to Columbia affiliates on Barnard’s campus.  After a significant amount of deliberation and consultation, I have concluded that the Rules do not apply for a number of reasons.

While Barnard is integrated with Columbia in many ways, it remains a legally and administratively independent institution with its own governance, policies, and disciplinary processes. The Rules apply to University facilities and University functions, where University in the statutes is defined as Columbia and not Barnard College. Thus, a plain reading of the Rules themselves makes clear that at this present moment jurisdictionally they do not apply to non-University facilities or functions.

Consultation with previous Rules Administrators and student discipline professionals did not reveal any cases where the Rules have been applied on Barnard's campus. Nor have we found any documentation in Rules Administration records that indicated the Rules were applied to Barnard’s campus.  Thus, there do not appear to be any precedents supporting the view that the Rules apply to Columbia students on Barnard's campus.

Additionally, the Rules depend fundamentally on the Delegate system, but there is currently no infrastructure for supporting the Delegate system on Barnard’s campus.

Historically, the role of Delegates has been restricted to the University’s campus or off-campus locations where there are clearly defined University-sponsored activities occurring.

Furthermore, Delegates critically depend on Columbia’s Public Safety for support in Rules administration. Delegates work in direct coordination with Public Safety to align Rules policy administration and on-the-ground security support. This partnership is essential for Delegates to effectively de-escalate situations, verify identification, and provide real-time documentation of other potential violations.  We do not send Delegates to protests and demonstrations outside our gates because Public Safety cannot support them there.

Thus, I do not see support for the position that the Rules apply to Columbia affiliates on Barnard’s campus--that are not part of a well-defined University function--from a plain reading of the text of the University Statutes, the lack of precedents, and in light of the practical considerations about the inability of the Delegate system to effectively operate outside of University facilities. To apply the Rules in a way that is not currently delineated would be unfair to the campus community. All members of the community are entitled to predictability, transparency, and fairness in their disciplinary processes and I am committed to those values in making these determinations.

Posted at 11:37 a.m. on Thursday, March 27, 2025

All individuals who engage in protests or demonstrations, including those who wear face masks or face coverings, must, when asked, present their University identification to the satisfaction of a University Delegate or Public Safety officer. Individuals who fail to comply with these policies will be subject to discipline, being escorted off campus, and detention for trespass where appropriate.

Posted at 11:15 p.m., Thursday, March 20, 2025

The Rules of University Conduct balance the exercise of rights to free expression and the rights pertaining to the achievement of Columbia's academic mission—to learn, teach, study, and engage in research.  An important role for the Office of Rules Administration and the Delegate system is to provide clear and fair time, place and manner parameters that will avoid disruption of academic activities.  These parameters have been updated at the Rules Administrator Website since the beginning of the academic year.

Demonstrations that occur inside academic buildings and places where academic activities take place, present a direct impediment to maintaining that balance, from noise that inhibits instruction, to the gathering of large crowds that can make it difficult to get access to classrooms. We are clarifying that such protests in academic buildings, and other places necessary for the conduct of University activities, are generally not acceptable under the Rules of University Conduct because of the likelihood of disrupting academic activities.

FAQs Regarding Decisions Release
Posted at 4:42 p.m. on Thursday, March 13, 2025

• When do the sanctions become effective?
  • The sanctions take effect after the conclusion of the appeal period and subject to such decisions from any such appeals.
     
• What happens if the respondent engages in any violations of University policy during the pendency of the appeal period?
  • The University may take immediate action during the pendency of a decision to preserve the safety of the community and the academic mission of the University, including instituting immediate discipline during the pendency of an appeal
     
• What happens to housing and campus access in the meantime?
  • Access to housing and the campus remains the same until the sanctions become effective.
     
• What is the appeal time frame and process?
  • The appeal process is laid out in full in our Rules of University Conduct.
  • The time frame for filing an appeal is five (5) business days after receiving the sanctioning decision 
  • There are three grounds for appeal provided for in our Rules, and they include: (1) Procedural error affecting the determination or sanction; (2) new information that was not available at the time of the investigation or hearing that may change the determination or sanction; and (3) excessiveness of sanction.
  • The Appellate panel, which consists of members of the University, is to render the decision within ten (10) business days of receipt of the written appeal.

FAQs for University Judicial Board (UJB) Hearings on Spring 2024 Cases [UPDATED]
Posted at 4:42 p.m. on Thursday, March 13, 2025

The below document includes questions and answers on matters related to the University Judicial Board’s (UJB) hearings on spring encampments and the occupation of Hamilton Hall. This will be updated and expanded as the process evolves.

1. What disciplinary process is being followed for the occupation of Hamilton Hall and other protest events from the spring?
   • Columbia began disciplinary processes immediately following these events. In the summer of 2024, the University began transferring these cases to the Rules of University Conduct (“Rules”) process from the Dean’s Discipline process and they are currently being adjudicated under the Rules by the University Judicial Board (“UJB”). The UJB is an independent hearing and sanctioning body consisting of faculty, students, and staff.
      
2. What kinds of cases does the UJB adjudicate?
   • The UJB considers cases that are brought under the Rules of University conduct only. It does not consider cases that arise under Standards & Discipline, nor does it consider cases that go through the Office of Institutional Equity.
      
3. When did UJB hearings begin this academic year?
   • After being transferred from Dean’s Discipline to the Rules process, the cases were submitted to the UJB in August and September 2024. Certain procedural inquiries were raised and addressed through the Senate Rules Committee and the Rules Administrator’s Office over the fall. Soon thereafter, hearings began during the first week of January.
      
4. What hearings have been completed by the UJB?
   • The hearings in connection with the encampment that occurred April 17-18, 2024 and the occupation of Hamilton Hall on April 30 have been completed.
      
5. What is the status of the Alumni Weekend encampment matters?
   • Those hearings before the UJB are expected to begin in the next few weeks.
      
6. How is the UJB ensuring fairness during the hearing process?
   • The hearings are conducted by the UJB and overseen by the Rules Clerk consistent with the Rules set forth in the University Statutes and the accompanying Guidelines issued by the Senate Rules Committee. Respondents have multiple safeguards in the process, including the opportunity to defend themselves in the hearings and have two advisors, including legal counsel. The respondent is given the opportunity to make an opening and closing statement after the opening and closing statements of the Rules Administrator. Only members of the UJB panel are allowed to ask questions of the respondent and the respondent is allowed to take breaks during the hearing to confer with advisors. The respondent has the right to refrain from making self-incriminating statements.
      
7. What were the steps that led to these hearings?
   • Following the disruptions of the last academic year, Columbia immediately began disciplinary processes, including interim suspensions. For cases in which students were  charged by law enforcement, the University formally initiated its processes once those law enforcement bodies had determined not to pursue further action. When the new Rules Administrator was appointed at the beginning of the fall semester, three matters from the spring remained open: the April 17-18 encampment, the Hamilton Hall occupation, and the Alumni Weekend encampment. Prior to Interim President Armstrong’s appointment, the University had committed to transfer these cases to the UJB appointed by the Executive Committee of the University Senate, at the request of many in our community. After resolving certain evidentiary and procedural inquiries, every effort was undertaken to expedite the process for this large volume of cases.
      
8. Is there an appeal process for the outcomes of the hearings and when will there be final resolution?
   • There is an appeal process set forth in the Rules. The respondents or the Rules Administrator may appeal determinations of responsibility and respondents may appeal sanctions. The Rules set out a timeline for completion of the appeals process.
      
9. Have our Rules and processes changed since the events of last Spring?

   • The Rules set forth in the Statutes have not changed. In late August 2024, the Senate Rules Committee issued revised Guidelines to accompany the Rules. The 2024 revisions are part of the review of the Rules and Guidelines that the Statutes of the University require the Rules Committee to undertake every four years.

10. Who are members of the Univeristy Judicial Board panel and how are they selected?
    • The UJB is made up of faculty, students, and staff only. Members of the UJB are selected by the Senate Executive Committee. While the President of the University sits on the Executive Committee, the President does not participate in the selection process.
       
11. Will all the hearings have the same UJB panel?  
    • Each matter has a specific UJB panel that is comprised of five members of the University community. For the matters from last year, each matter has had a different panel.
       
12. What if a member of the UJB panel or the Rules Administrator has a conflict of interest?

    • UJB members complete conflict of interest forms that are reviewed by the respondent and the Rules Administrator, and both the respondent and the Rules Administrator can raise a potential conflict. The Senate Executive Committee reviewed any potential conflicts raised with respect to members of the UJB. The President and the Provost do not participate in that process. The Rules Administrator could have a conflict, and is required to take steps to address it, such as assigning an Assistant Rules Administrator to take charge of a case or hearing.

Update By Gregory J. Wawro, Rules Administrator and Professor of Political Science
Posted at 12:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 12, 2025

Nobel Prize winner Douglass North, one of my academic heroes, defined institutions as follows: "Institutions are the humanly devised constraints that structure political, economic, and social interaction. They consist of both informal constraints (sanctions, taboos, customs, traditions, and codes of conduct), and formal rules (constitutions, laws, property rights)."  For the nearly 30 years I have taught at Columbia as a political scientist, I have tried to make the case to my students of the importance of institutions, especially in a democracy, and why they should share my interest in advancing knowledge about how institutions function.

Three of the most critical features of institutions that make them valuable are that they promote fairness, transparency, and efficiency.  When I was asked to take on the role of Rules Administrator six months ago, I pledged that everything I do in this role must meet the highest standards of fairness, transparency, and efficiency.  To be sure, there are challenges to achieving this goal, and I am grateful for the hard work that members of the Office of Rules Administration and the many individuals throughout the University that we partner with have put in to overcome those challenges.  We can always do better, and I am committed to constantly improving the administration of the Rules of University Conduct.

One of the biggest tasks that I've faced during my tenure as Rules Administrator is to bring to resolution the large number of cases that arose from the protest and demonstration activity from Academic Year 2023-2024.  I have worked with the University Judicial Board, which is empowered by the University Senate to act as an independent hearing panel and sanctioning body, to follow our processes under the Rules, including holding individual hearings for every case.  Hearings have been completed for cases in connection with the April 17-18 encampment on the South Lawn and the occupation of Hamilton Hall.  Some factors beyond our control made the processing of these cases less efficient than many would have liked, but I am grateful for the difficult work that has been done by many to enable us to adhere to our processes to ensure fair treatment of those involved.  We still have cases left over from last academic year to see through to resolution, but I am confident that this will be completed soon.  

For all of these cases, I am confident that the community will accept the legitimacy of the outcomes, whatever they may be, since we followed our longstanding practices and policies under the Rules.  Institutions are viable only if we accept the outcomes that they produce even though we might disagree with those outcomes.

Over the past six months, members of the community have continued to exercise their broad free speech rights that have been granted in the University statutes.  We have seen continued protest and demonstration activity on campus, but nearly all of that activity has followed the parameters laid out in the Rules of University Conduct, demonstrating that we can achieve balance between the exercise of free speech rights and rights to engage in academic activities that constitute the core mission of the University.  In the few cases where it has not, I have fulfilled my responsibilities as Rules Administrator, following our processes and maintaining strict content neutrality, to bring charges of violations of the Rules.  As a measure of improvement in Rules administration, those cases have progressed more expeditiously.

As is usually the case in large institutions, much work remains to be done.  I look forward to continuing this work to improve the fairness and efficiency of the University’s processes. I also look forward to continuing outreach efforts with students, student life professionals, and faculty colleagues to enhance transparency and build trust in our processes.  

Serving as Rules Administrator is the most difficult role I've served in my career.  It has been incredibly heartening to see the positive response to our efforts to promote fairness, transparency, and efficiency and the tremendous support throughout the community for tackling with unity the immense challenges we face.

Posted at 11:27 a.m. on Thursday, March 6, 2025

The University received a notice about an anticipated demonstration to take place today on campus at 1pm.  The Rules of University Conduct give the University the ability to regulate, time, place and manner for demonstrations.  Given the potential size of the demonstration, safety concerns, and possible counter-protests, the University has established parameters for the demonstration to take place on Low Plaza and not Low Steps.  Delegates and Public Safety will be on site to advise those present on the parameters that have been established.

Posted at 11:58 a.m. on Monday, February 24, 2025

The Rules of University Conduct seek to balance protecting free expression and achievement of Columbia's academic mission. The Rules specify a limited set of areas where free expression can conflict with achievement of academic goals and thereby undermine the University's mission. A protest that disrupts a class while it is in session is one of those areas. Section 443 of the Rules indicates the ways in which classroom disruptions can constitute both simple and serious violations. The Rules seek to uphold the core value that all members of the University community have paramount rights to learn and engage in meaningful debate in a classroom setting.

Posted at 12:58 p.m. on Thursday, February 13, 2025

We have been alerted to a notice on social media for a Tu B’Shvat Seder and Teach-In to occur in Lerner Hall. The event appears to have a significant demonstration component, and thus the Rules of University Conduct apply.  Some of the groups advertising this event are not recognized student organizations and are thus not authorized to go through the established processes for reserving space. Following reservation processes is important because they serve to ensure equitable access to campus spaces.  We remain committed to permitting engagement in free expression while guaranteeing the safety of our campus community and maintaining our academic mission without disruption. Delegates will be on site to advise participants of the Rules of University Conduct.

FAQs for University Judicial Board (UJB) Hearings on Spring 2024 Cases
Posted at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, January 24, 2025

The below document includes questions and answers on matters related to the University Judicial Board’s (UJB) hearings on spring encampments and the occupation of Hamilton Hall. This will be updated and expanded as the process evolves.

1. What disciplinary process is being followed for the occupation of Hamilton Hall and other protest events from the spring? 
   
   Columbia began disciplinary processes immediately following these events. In the summer of 2024, the University began transferring these cases to the Rules of University Conduct (“Rules”) process from the Dean’s Discipline process and they are currently being adjudicated under the Rules by the University Judicial Board (“UJB”).
    
2. When did UJB hearings begin this academic year?
   
   After being transferred from Dean’s Discipline to the Rules process, the cases were submitted to the UJB in August and September 2024. Certain procedural inquiries were raised and addressed through the Senate Rules Committee and the Rules Administrator’s Office over the fall. Soon thereafter, hearings began the week of January 6.
    
3. What were the hearings that were conducted during the weeks of January 6 and January 13 by the UJB?
   
   The hearings conducted during the weeks of January 6 and January 13 pertain to events in April, separate from the Hamilton Hall occupation.
    
4. What is the status of the Hamilton Hall hearings?
   
   Those hearings before the UJB are expected to begin in late January.
    
5. What is the status of the Alumni Weekend encampment matters?
   
   Those hearings before the UJB are expected to begin after the Hamilton Hall hearings are complete.
    
6. How is the UJB ensuring fairness during the hearing process?
   
   The hearings are being conducted by the UJB and overseen by the Rules Clerk consistent with the Rules set forth in the University Statutes and the accompanying Guidelines issued by the Senate Rules Committee. Respondents have multiple safeguards in the process, including the opportunity to defend themselves in the hearings and have two advisors, including legal counsel. Only members of the UJB panel are allowed to ask questions of the respondent and the respondent is allowed to take breaks during the hearing to confer with advisors.
    
7. What were the steps that led to these hearings?
   
   Following the disruptions of the last academic year, Columbia immediately began disciplinary processes, including interim suspensions. For cases in which students were

   charged by law enforcement, the University formally initiated its processes once those law enforcement bodies had determined not to pursue further action.

   When the new Rules Administrator was appointed at the beginning of the fall semester, three matters from the spring remained open: the April 17-18 encampment, the Hamilton Hall occupation, and the Alumni Weekend encampment. Prior to Interim President Armstrong’s appointment, the University had committed to transfer these cases to the UJB appointed by the Executive Committee of the University Senate, at the request of many in our community.

   After resolving certain evidentiary and procedural inquiries, every effort was undertaken to expedite the process for this large volume of cases.

8. Is there an appeal process for the outcomes of the hearings and when will there be final resolution?
   
   There is an appeal process set forth in the Rules. The respondents or the Rules Administrator may appeal determinations of responsibility and respondents may appeal sanctions.  
    
9. Have our Rules and processes changed since the events of last Spring?
   
   The Rules set forth in the Statutes have not changed. In late August, the Senate Rules Committee issued revised Guidelines to accompany the Rules.
    
10. How are members of the University Judicial Board selected?
    
    Members of the UJB are selected by the Senate Executive Committee.  While the President sits on the Executive Committee, the President does not participate in the selection process.  
     
11. Will all the hearings have the same UJB panel?
    
    Each matter has a specific UJB panel that is comprised of five members of the University community, faculty, staff and students. For the matters from last year, it is expected that each matter will have different panels.
     
12. What if a member of the UJB panel or the Rules Administrator has a conflict?
    
    UJB members complete conflict of interest forms that are reviewed by the respondent and the Rules Administrator, and both the respondent and the Rules Administrator can raise a potential conflict. The Senate Executive Committee reviewed any potential conflicts raised with respect to members of the UJB. The President and the Provost do not participate in that process. The Rules Administrator could have a conflict, and is required to take steps to address it, such as assigning an Assistant Rules Administrator to take charge of a case or hearing.

Posted at 1:40 p.m. on Monday, December 9, 2024

As we enter this period of study days and final exams, we all must be mindful that our students, faculty, and staff are fully engaged in completing coursework, finishing final papers, preparing for and taking exams, and fulfilling other end-of-year requirements. It is particularly important during these last weeks of the semester that we respect the hard and focused work that our community is immersed in and do all that we can to maintain an academic and campus environment that supports their work. During this critical period of the semester the risk of disruption of academic activity by protests and demonstrations is more pronounced.  Such disruptions would constitute violations of the Rules of University Conduct and would be processed accordingly.

Posted at 1:55 p.m. on Thursday, November 21, 2024

We received an unsigned notice through our Events Notification System that a group of about 75 participants intends to protest between 5 pm and 7 pm on November 21^st  in the 4^th floor lobby of the International Affairs Building, followed by a march through campus.

Given that there are 448 registered students in 13 classrooms on the 4^th floor at that time, this notice raised serious concerns that the proposed demonstration would interfere with the ongoing academic activity in that location and therefore create the possibility of a violation of the Rules of University Conduct.  Over the past several days there has been broad consultation with University leaders, members of the University Senate, Public Safety, and students to determine how we could provide logistical support in a way that would permit engagement in free expression while guaranteeing the safety of our campus community and maintaining our academic mission without disruption. 

It is our understanding that the protest may now take place outside of the International Affairs Building at the designated time. This significantly reduces concerns about campus safety and academic disruption. Delegates will be on site to remind and advise participants of the Rules and potential violations. Should participants gather in IAB, they will be directed to an outside location to ensure there is no safety concern or academic disruption.

Our objective for this advance communication to the community and potential protest participants is to ensure that the safety of our campus community is preserved, that academic activities can proceed uninterrupted, and that our students can engage in free expression consistent with the University's rules and policies.

Posted at 1:55 p.m. on Thursday, November 21, 2024

On Wednesday, October 16, 2024, a group of students erected a sukkah without following policies for student event review. The University Outdoor Space Policy requires that space be reserved in advance and that all structures be ordered through Facilities. These policies are content neutral and apply equally to both religious and non-religious events.  The Office of Religious Life had previously engaged the students involved and let them know that erecting the structure would be a policy violation, and later asked them to take down the structure to avoid possible policy violations. The students, having been advised of possible violations, chose to erect and maintain the sukkah as a campus demonstration. On Wednesday evening, October 23^rd, 2024, the students dismantled and removed the Sukkah.

The Office of Religious Life, which is committed to providing the resources needed for our entire community, shared information on its website and through student dean channels about the many sukkahs that were available across our campuses.  The Office of Religious Life sukkah, made available to all students for the duration of the Sukkot holiday, was located in front of Fairchild and open from 8:00AM to 8:00PM daily.   This sukkah was erected to ensure that everyone in the Columbia community had access to a sukkah where they would feel welcome, irrespective of religious or political beliefs. 

All actions by participants in connection with this demonstration will be evaluated fairly and consistently under applicable University policies and processes, including the Rules of University Conduct, to determine whether violations may have occurred. If violations are identified, charges will be pursued through the appropriate process – the Rules of University Conduct and/or Deans Discipline.