OPINION
WWW.GUILFORDlAN.COM
Regardless of race, restorative justice needs to work for all
\
A ';v*vi
/
^ ••
' I **' •
/
/
ay..
J ustice
INTENTIONAL SENSITIVITY TRAINING,
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION NEEDED
Guilford College seems to be a unique educational
institution — one of two private colleges to declare itself
"anti-racist" and one of few with a judicial system based
on restorative justice. But how do these commitments
play out?
Without guidance, institutions
and their employees may reinforce
unequal, pervasive racial dynamics.
Thus it is important to look closely at
systems that are in place, especially
those involving the administering of
justice.
In Guilford's case, the Commimity
Accountability Project process is as
follows; a student is documented and
they attend a meeting with someone
from Campus Life to determine if they
are responsible. If so, the student goes
to a hearing consisting of one facilitator
and three trained community members
— students, faculty or staff.
When I inquired about what this training consisted of.
Director of Judicial Affairs Sandy Bowles described it as
only a "conversation."
"There isn't a whole lot of formal training," said
Bowles. "We talk about how we are going to handle stuff,
but a lot of the time ... I take the lead and (other staff) are
just watching."
So, what are the consequences of a stciff not trained in
cultural sensitivity or multicultural education?
"Being a person of color, you don't really get fairness,"
said senior Joyce Medina, a Hispanos Unidos at Guilford
member who knows students who have been through the
judicial process. From her understanding, "they don't
really treat you equally."
An anonymous student of color was told her hearing
would be with a diverse group of faculty, staff and
students, but instead she was the only person of color
in the meeting, which she described as an "isolating"
experience.
"I could tell they were only listening to half of what I
was saying," she said.
BY
ALEXANDRA
HARIDOPOLOS
Staff Writer
(The process) takes a toll on you mentally, emotionally;"
said senior economics major Cory Collins. "It (makes it)
hard to focus on school."
Without intentional sensitivity training or multicultural
education workshops, the Judicial Affairs Office cannot
expect to treat all students equally.
"One of the biggest weaknesses is how many decisions
are made by one person or kind of oligarchy-style," said
junior and judicial advocate Julia Draper.
Students can write a letter of appeal to Dean of Students
Aaron Fetrow.
"(However,) they almost never get accepted," Draper
said. "Fetrow usually agrees with the decision they
made."
Where is space for accountability in this?
Bowles expressed needing more feedback from
students. But for some students of color, their experiences
have turned them away from reaching out.
The anonvmous female student-said the office is "not a
resource for students of color."
"I wouldn't feel comfortable going to them," said
Medina.
Collins sought help from campus life about a difficult
roommate situation. He was not helped and given the
impression he should "tough it out."
This pattern mirrors many people of color's experiences
with police.
As Michelle Alexander wrote in her New York Times
bestseller, "The New Jim Crow," "The last thing most
people want to do after experiencing a frightening and
intrusive encounter with the police is show up at the
police station where the officer works and attract more
attention to themselves."
"I think it's really awkward when you have to go into
a CAP meeting and you see people who you drink with
on the weekends," said Collins. 'They are sitting in that
chair and they are looking at you and they're like, 'You
shouldn't be doing this,' ... and then you see them at the
same party as you."
A student representative does not guarantee CAP will
be supportive to the charged student, especially if they
received little training. Altiiough student participation is
a creative way to incorporate different community voices,
it seems to be a convenient way to avoid hiring resources
such as social workers or community psychologists.
Guilford must invest in creating an inclusive campus
or our declarations will become misnomers.
President’s use of executive orders is necessary to combat partisan Congress
Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan's recent
criticism of President Barack Obama's
use of executive orders is removed from
reality.
The outcry stems
from the recent State
of the Union address
where the president
promised to establish a
higher minimum wage
for federally contracted
workers without
legislative action.
"We have an
increasingly lawless
presidency," said Ryan.
Many citizens,
including Ryan, think
this subverts the system, undermining
the fact Congress is the body that passes
legislation, not the White House.
"He's going the wrong approach," said
first-year Cassidy Bennett, a member
of Young Americans for Liberty. "He's
working without (Congress) when he
should be working together."
But the proposed minimum wage hike
is not exactly "lawless."
BY IAN PENNY
Staff Writer
"The laws are always vaguer than
the rules implemented," said Chair and
Associate Professor of Political Science
Maria Rosales. "The president can say, 'A
law means this.'"
Using an executive order to craft how
existing legislation is enforced is perfectly
acceptable.
Every president except William Heniy
Harrison — who died a month into his
term — has at one time or another made
an executive order.
A simple fact check finds that the 168
executive orders Obama has made pales
in comparison to the 3,522 Franklin
Roosevelt authorized. Recent two-term
presidents Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton
and George W. Bush sanctioned 381, 364
and 291 executive orders, respectively.
"It's not the number of executive orders;
it's the scope," said Ryan to ABC News'
George Stephanopoulos.
That is a fair point.
All presidents, from time to time, have
overstepped their bounds. Ryan has just
greatly exaggerated the extent of Obama's
actions, repeating a talking point that tries
to paint them as abnormal.
To avoid cherry-picking the contents of
each executive order Obama has made, all
publicly available through The American
Presidency Project web archive, I will just
make something clear: these executive
orders can be misused.
Executive Order 9066 prescribed the
interment of Japanese Americans during
World War II. Abraham Lincoln suspended
habeas corpus via executive order in 1861.
There is no indication, however, that
President Obama has authorized anything
remotely as illegal or questionable.
If Paul Ryan wants to pursue the
president for wielding power in a
"lawless" manner, he should note the
increased use of drones during his term,
slam him for illegal NSA information
gathering or criticize some dubious recess
appointments he made in 2012.
Just don't try to portray his use of
executive orders as a gross mishandling of
power. Obama is doing his job.
If Congress takes issue with that, they
should pass new laws that dictate explicitly
what they want. But, with leaders like
Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Harry Reid at
the helm, 1 doubt that will happen.
Only one percent of bills have been
passed this congressional term, putting the
current Congress in contention for being
the least productive of all time. Perhaps
there is still time to reverse course.
"Congress should focus on the country,"
said junior Patrick TAtithrow.
Instead of complaining about President
Obama doing his job and getting things
done, maybe Paul Ryan should do his.
All presidents, from time to time, hove overstepped their bounds. Ryan has just greatly exaggerated
the extent of Obama's actions, repeating a talking point that tries to paint them as abnormal.