You are on page 1of 9

The Censure of Senator Jake Corsi:


It is found that the actions of Senator Jake Corsi violate the following:

1. The Student Association’s Constitution (Section IX, Section B)

2. The GW Code of Student Conduct
3. The Infrastructure Special Committee Act

The Constitution of the Student Association, Section IX, Section B reads as follows:

B.​ ​Recognizing that the Student Association is made up of student representatives from
different communities, all active members of the Student Association will be held to the
highest professional and ethical standards. They shall:

1.​ ​Uphold the law of the United States of America, of the District of Columbia, and
their respective communities;

2.​ ​Uphold the student rights and responsibilities outlined in university policies
including but not limited to the GW Code of Student Conduct​, Housing License
Agreement, Title IX policy, and the Code of Academic Integrity;

3.​ ​Be mindful of actions and comments expressed via online platforms, including
on their social media profiles;

The Constitution of the Student Association, Section IX, Section B reads as follows:

(a) Senators shall:

(1) Hold one publicized office hour per week per constituency during fall and
spring semesters in a central campus location or through virtual methods to
meet with constituents and work on projects. These locations may include but
are not limited to:
(i) The SA office (ii) Marvin Center (iii) Kogan Plaza (iv) Pelham Commons (v)
University Yard; (b) Attend meetings of student organizations comprised of their
respective constituents to stay informed about issues facing students; (c) Meet with
administrators, faculty, staff, and student organization leaders to discuss projects and
legislation; (d) Attend two diversity and inclusion trainings that have been identified by
the Governance and Nominations Committee, one in the fall semester and another in the
spring semester, such as, but not limited to, the following trainings lead by the
Multicultural Student Services Center:
(1) Diversity
(2) LGBTQIA Diversity and Inclusion (3) Religious Diversity and Inclusion (4)
Unconscious Bias (5) The Art of Bridge Building (6) Transgender Diversity &
Inclusion (7) Multiculturalism in the United States (8) What Do I Really Believe?
Remembering Our Values (e) The Freshman Senators are required to host at least two
public discussions, in the form of forums or town halls, to receive feedback on the
freshman experience. At least one such event must occur each semester.

The GW Student Code of Conduct reads as follows:

i. Discriminatory Harassment is any unwelcome conduct based on a protected

characteristic where such conduct creates a hostile environment. A​ hostile environment
exists when the conduct is sufficiently severe, persistent, or pervasive that it
unreasonably interferes with, limits, or deprives an individual from participating in or
benefiting from the university’s educational, co-curricular, and/or campus-residential
experience when viewed through both a subjective and objective standard. ​This means
that an aggrieved party’s subjective perception that certain conduct violates this
provision must be objectively reasonable to constitute discriminatory harassment.
A hostile environment can be created by persistent or pervasive conduct or by a single
or isolated incident, if sufficiently severe. The more severe the conduct, the less need
there is to show a repetitive series of incidents to prove a hostile environment.

The Infrastructure Special Committee Act reads as follows:

BE IT ENACTED ​that the Committee will meet ​at least twice a month​ during the 2019-2020
Academic Year;

BE IT ENACTED ​that the Committee will provide a ​monthly u​ pdate to the Full Senate;


On September 5​th​, the GW Hatchet reported, “Officials working to address racist Snapchat post
from sorority president’s account.” This story has reignited a conversation on our campus about
our university’s treatment of students of color, and what we, as the Student Association, can do
to help. Both President Matthews and Executive Vice President Martin found it pertinent to
release an official statement condemning the action conducted by this student.On September 5,
In response to the facebook post of the statement, Senator Corsi commented, “Targeting a fellow
student and an RSO without all the facts over a crude joke is abhorrent.”
Additionally, In the September ninth senate meeting, Senator Corsi said: “​So in regards to the
recent targeting of a student on campus, I was kind of appalled about the Hatchet and the Student
Government response. ... I think we have a very small minority of students holding certain
leaders on campus hostage. I think sometimes people need to take a deep breath and actually
look at these issues and come to a reasonable response.”

SB-F19-01, The Infrastructure Special Committee Act, mandates that the committee
“meet at least twice a month during the 2019-2020 Academic Year.” As of October 25, 2019, the
Infrastructure Committee has not met once. The act also mandates that the committee will
“provide a monthly update to the Full Senate,” which it also has not done since its creation on
September 9, 2019. ​By violating the provisions of a piece of legislation Senator Corsi himself
sponsored, he has failed to fulfill his duties and responsibilities as a member of the Student
Association, resulting in this censure under Article VI, Section 1 of the SA Constitution.


It is found that the actions of Senator Jake Corsi violate the Student Code of Conduct as
Discriminatory Harassment. The actions of Senator Corsi have created a hostile environment by
depriving an individual of participating in the university's co-curricular activities as cited by the
resignation letter of former Senator Caroline Beason which was sent to the Senate on September
15, 2019. Although the letter does not address Senator Corsi by name, Senator Beason told
members of the Student Association that the rhetoric of Senator Corsi when confronting a
nominee and when responding to the Black Town Hall was the main cause for her resignation.
She states: “I had hoped to make a positive impact on my community, but I would be unable to
achieve this, given the persistent toxicity and disrespect that have become normalized within this
organization’s culture.”

At the full senate meeting on October 28, after a member of public rose during public
comment to share his experience with the mental health services available at the Colonial Health
Center, Sen. Corsi derailed the meeting in order to criticize the freedom of speech exercised by
Sen. Haining Bao and attempt a failed vote on the decorum of Sen. Bao’s presentation of flags.
At the time these charges are being brought minutes have not yet been published mut many
members of the senate can attest to the events occuring.

On September 5th Senator Jake Corsi sent an email to the Student Association regarding
his blatant absence of the Student Association’s Diversity and Inclusion Training. This shows a
pattern of behavior of not learning about and interacting with the issues that are being faced by
the people who he represents as well as a lack of respect for the mandatory trainings in place. It
is believed that the comments of Sen. Corsi are an advert reaction to his lack of interaction with
diversity and inclusion education.

The rhetoric of Senator Corsi also encouraged Quentin Mchoes, the former Vice President of
Undergraduate Policy to rise during public comment and state ​“ Some of you may know that I am
SJ’s VPUSP, but I feel compelled to make a few comments. Recently I was in a meeting with the
Joint Committee of Faculty and Students with Nicole, our Pro Tempore, and others, and during
that meeting, it was quite interesting because a member of the faculty kept making comments
like, “the SA isn’t mature,” and that this body is really for us to… when we are ready to have the
“grown-up” conversations after we get done fooling around in SA, and after we do so we can go
to the Faculty Senate. I was appalled when I heard that, but honestly, after being in this meeting
today, I see exactly what they are talking about, and I say that as a student, not as SJ’s VPUSP. I
found it abhorrent that Sen. Corsi decided to ambush a nominee without discussing his alleged
issues with the president. I think there is a repeated comment that SJ and the executive cannot be
trusted, or that she is not good, but then there are no actual steps taken to communicate with her.
He did that for the sole purpose of ambushing her and making the executive look bad. I don’t
think that that is the good relationship that we all promised we would make when we all started
after the elections. I think it is also unbecoming to have Dean Petty in the room during comments
that were made about the administrators. We can have our disagreements with the
administrative body, but to make those comments while an administrator is in the room and then
wonder why administrators aren’t on the bandwagon to join in terms of helping the SA, makes
me quite interested. We really need to take it upon ourselves to take up the mantle of leadership
and actually do the work that we were sent here to do. I just have to say how truly disappointed I
was in everything that has happened tonight. It was unbelievable the disrespect that I thought
was shown to the EVP, and I really hope as a student that is in his final year here, that we can do
better. We must do better.” ​ Prior to the statement it was mutually decided that the concerns
senator corsi raised regarding his view of the Black Community Forum would be discussed at the
end of the meeting. Due to Corsi disregard of this agreement he left early which showed an
innate pattern of not trying to learn and interact with diverse viewpoints. Thus, misrepresenting
the facts.


The rhetoric from Senator Corsi about the listening session being racially “segregated” spread to
other senators. His misrepresentation of the facts lead others to believe that he was telling the
truth about the listening session. It is evident that it spread because at the 9/9/19 senate meeting
then Senator Gunter asked a question to the then acting VPDI about why a racially segregated
meeting was held. Misrepresenting facts is very dangerous and it can lead to other members
being simply wrong about their public statements. It also creates an environment that is not
beneficial for students as many were affected by the snapchat incident at the beginning of the
year. Spreading false information could cause unnecessary discourse within the GW community
and goes against the GW Code of Conduct where it condemns conduct that creates a hostile