On August 22, Georgetown’s Office of Student Conduct (OSC) approved the 2025-2026 Code of Student Conduct, which clarifies the previous student conduct standards and introduces new changes to student organization guidelines and the citation process.
Nicole Abudayeh (SFS ’26), co-director of the Georgetown University Student Advocacy Office (SAO), spoke to the Voice about what the changes entail.
“Although there have been actual technical changes, a lot of OSC’s initiative this year was to create more intentional language and create more transparency with the code of conduct,” Abudayeh said.
Updated Student Organization Guidelines
The explicit description of conduct guidelines for student organizations is one of the most significant changes, according to Madeleine Callender (CAS ’26), co-director of SAO.
The previous Code of Student Conduct redirected student organizations to the Division of Student Affairs standards, while the revised code of conduct explicitly states how the code applies to student organizations and the specific sanctions for violation.
In particular, the code writes that “member Students may be held accountable under the Code for their individual actions as well as the Student Organization’s actions which may violate the Code.”
The code may hold individual members collectively (multiple members or entire organizations, depending on circumstance) and individually responsible for code violations. The OSC will communicate with the student organization’s president, who is the primary representative by default, or with a different member if the organization puts forward such a request and the OSC grants it.
“Organizational misconduct is a separate set of guidelines that organizations are being held to,” Callender said. “Those organizational sanctions can also, in certain circumstances, be combined with individual sanctions, depending on what the incident is.”
Sanctions to student organizations may include the removal of individuals from the organization or from their position, loss of access to benefits for a period or until conditions are met, or severing the university’s relationship with the organization by permanently banning the organization from operating on campus.
Changes to Citation Processes
While the Residential Living expectations for excessive noise or misuse of alcohol have not changed, the new code of conduct introduces a separate citation procedure to handle violations of Residential Living expectations or off-campus living expectations.
Upon receipt of the citation, students have five days to appeal and request an Administrative Conference. If they do not appeal within five days without good cause for an extension, the OSC will assume the student has accepted responsibility, and the citation will be final.
Sanctions for violations escalate with each additional offense, and can range from a warning to party restrictions and work sanctions.
Abudayeh recognized that receiving a citation can be stressful for students, but hoped that changes in record-keeping could ease their worries.
“The system has shifted so that only a suspension or dismissal will be reported,” Abudayeh said. “If a student receives some kind of warning, as long as the student completes all of their sanctions, they will go back to being in good standing.”
Abudayeh said that the new citation process could increase the number of cases, but will hopefully make the process easier and fairer to students.
Trained community members, such as Resident Assistants (RAs), will be a part of this process.
“We also want to ensure that every single community member, from the RAs to the community directors, are trained in the new process, so that each student is actually receiving a fair chance,” Abudayeh said.
Code of conduct clarifications
The Voice also compiled a list of the clarifications to existing student conduct policies.
Incident Report
The code now specifies that a report should be made within twenty days of the incident happening. Reports after this period may affect the university’s ability to gather information. Additionally, it explicitly states that allegations that the Title IX office determines are within the scope of Sexual Misconduct will be resolved under the Sexual Misconduct Policies and Procedures.
Confidentiality
Georgetown community members have varying levels of requirement to share information which range from confidential, semi-confidential, and non-confidential resources. The confidentiality designations have been in use but are now explicitly stated in the code.
External civil or criminal matters
The revised code also clarifies how external civil or criminal matters impact a student’s standing with the university. The code delineates that the Director of Student Conduct may initiate the Community Standard Process—how the university responds to allegations of students violating the Code of Student Conduct— under their discretion, even if the student was not convicted of a crime.
Abuse of the Community Standards Process
The code adds one additional example of abuse of the Community Standards Process. The code prohibits sharing information about specific cases related to the Code of Student Conduct, including sharing information that was learned solely through the Community Standards Process. The code also prohibits publicly disclosing the identities of parties involved in any Community Standards Process without their consent.
Invasion of Privacy
Invasion of privacy is a new category under the abuse of the Community Standards Process entailing the intrusion into another individual’s personal life or information without their consent. Examples include recording someone without their consent, accessing information without authorization, or spying on someone.
Assault and Battery
Assault and battery were not previously identified as separate forms of prohibited conduct, as the previous Code of Student Conduct grouped them under the category of physical violence. Under the updated code, to assault is “to intentionally act or threaten to act in a manner that causes a reasonable fear of imminent physical harm or offensive contact in another person.”
Behavior that constitutes assault includes physical attempts or gestures, threatening words or behavior accompanied by the apparent ability to carry out the threat, and attempts to physically harm another person. Assault does not have to include physical contact.
Battery is defined as intentional physical contact with another person or animal that is harmful, offensive, or made without consent. This can include using an object or substance to physically harm and engaging in physical contact without consent, regardless of whether an injury occurs.
Defacement, Damage, or Destruction
Defacement, damage, or destruction include “unauthorized alteration, harm, or ruin of another’s property or University property.” The code now specifies digital assets as university property.
Failure to Follow Fire Safety Requirements
The new code specifies more actions that violate the fire safety requirements, including “tampering with, removing, or disabling fire alarms, smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, sprinkler systems, or exit signs.” Additionally, students may not block fire exits and pathways, ignore or refuse to comply with fire safety instructions, and fail to follow a shelter-in-place order.
Failure to Follow Security Requirements
Additional violation of security requirements now includes allowing unauthorized individuals to access areas that can be reasonably inferred as off-limits—such as rooftops, electrical or mechanical rooms, restricted locker or field rooms, construction sites, or another student’s room—without permission.
Misuse of Alcohol
On the condition that at least one resident is of legal drinking age, students are now permitted to possess alcohol, including kegs, in Henle, Byrnes, and Hayden Hall. The code continues to permit kegs in previously-approved Alumni Square, Nevils, Village A, and Ryan Hawkins Hall.
Hazing
Cases involving hazing will now be referred for an Investigation and Administrative Conference and cannot be resolved through Educational Conferences or Alternative Resolutions.
What’s next?
Students are responsible for being aware of the Code of Student Conduct, a university spokesperson said in a statement to the Voice.
“Georgetown’s tradition of Jesuit education honors the worth and dignity of all members of our community. An important expression of the values at the heart of this tradition is the Code of Student Conduct,” the spokesperson wrote. “It is the responsibility of Georgetown students to know and abide by the Code of Student Conduct.”
The spokesperson said that the university welcomes students to participate in a focus group with the Division of Student Affairs.
SAO plans to educate students on how the Code of Student Conduct works. SAO will host a Know Your Rights presentation, which explains students rights and the Community Standards Process in a more digestible format, according to Callender. She also said that organizations can reach out to SAO to request a presentation for their organization.
Callender said that students can reach out to whoever is conducting their disciplinary process or SAO if they are unclear about any part of the process.
“I understand that this is scary, and that is why we are here,” Callender said. “Oftentimes going to the source can be the best kind of way for them to tell you what that process is actually going to look like.”
