Are today's colleges over-stepping their boundaries?

once again proving that "elite" doesn't mean you need to know how to spell or anything like that.

I don't know, maybe require proof of any crime before actions are taken, i.e. some kind of citation or public record. Even then, a Minor In Possession isn't much more serious than speeding ticket.

And association does not imply causation. Let the police worry whether or not someone is guilty of a felony, and if they are, THEN kick them out.

Also, I don't think your employer/employee analogy is appropriate. The school does not employ students. Students pay the school for an education. Stopping that education for something that is completely outside of school boundaries is over the line. I guess a school is more like a gym or country club--there should be rules about what goes on in the club, and even rules about criminal records, but no one in their right mind would stand to be kicked out of a place they paid to be in for something that the club "heard" that occured outside of that place.

At the very least, a refund would be demanded--something I doubt universities do in cases where students are kicked out.

Any institution, whether public or private, has a right to decide who they will and will not allow to associate with them in order to best carry out their mission. They are under no obligation to let due process run its course in the governmental legal system before acting in their own best interest.

NY runner wrote:

If you think today's colleges aren't liberal enough you might be liberal.

Their crackdown on drinking is another example of the pussification of our country, which was brought about by liberals like you. The chickens are comming home to roost.

Hmm, it's more likely that the radical fundy extremist neocons would be the ones opposing drinking and partying, they seem to take offense to anyone having a good time that doesn't include them and their bibles and isn't at someone else's expense.

c stacks wrote:

I don't know, maybe require proof of any crime before actions are taken, i.e. some kind of citation or public record. Even then, a Minor In Possession isn't much more serious than speeding ticket.

...

Also, I don't think your employer/employee analogy is appropriate. The school does not employ students. Students pay the school for an education. Stopping that education for something that is completely outside of school boundaries is over the line. ...

At the very least, a refund would be demanded--something I doubt universities do in cases where students are kicked out.

Require proof of a crime before kids can get kicked out of school? Where does that leave schools like Liberty/BYU that are founded on religious principles? They can't kick kids out for "immoral" behavior? Or UVa, where honor code violations that aren't crimes are neverthless grounds for expulsion? Look- the schools have a right to say who their students are and how their students behave. It is their f'in school.

In fact, trying to ensure that the students are not convicted criminals would seem to be the LOWEST possible standard that a school should enforce.

Why should a refund be granted? It is no secret that UVa has an honor code or that Liberty/BYU are religious schools. Duke's student athlete policy was published. If the students go there, they know what to expect...