On Monday, April 28, the Student Government Association (SGA) announced in a university-wide email that the Stevens Divest From War Initiative’s (SDFWI) Letter from the Student Body has received sufficient approval from the undergraduate student body. This letter, now delivered to the Board of Trustees and President Farvardin, calls on the university to divest the school’s endowment from companies or investments that violate international law and human rights principles.
This victory for the initiative follows the SDFWI’s earlier attempt to have the SGA Senate approve a proclamation on the subject of divestment. That vote, which was tabled once and led to amendments in the original proclamation and proposal, did not reach the two-thirds majority required for passage. However, the Letter from the Student Body (LSB) program, which was designed by the SGA to provide students with an alternative avenue to communicate to University leadership, has enabled this movement to gain traction.
LSB is a new initiative created by the SGA to give students the opportunity to share their opinions with specific university administrations or departments. The process entails submitting an official letter to the SGA’s Secretary that includes the opinion, the recipients of the letter, and the names of the members of the student body who are proposing the letter. The Secretary then presents these details to the SGA Senate, after which the voting period begins.
The voting platform is managed by the SGA and remains open for a two-week period during which at least 10% of the undergraduate student body must vote, and at least two-thirds of the votes must be in favor of the terms of the letter. If one-third or more of the votes are cast against the letter, it fails to pass. After the voting period, the Elections Committee of the SGA certifies the voting numbers and presents a verdict. If the letter passes, the Secretary delivers it to the intended recipients. If it fails to pass, proposers of the letter are welcome to try again.
In contrast with a proclamation, the SGA Senate does not vote on the matter, and the President does not sign the letter. Published Senate meeting minutes do not include discussion on the creation of the LSB, and the minutes from the meeting where the bill was likely voted on have not yet been made available on the SGA’s website. The Stute had the opportunity to interview Aden Vishnevsky, the Rules Committee Chair of the SGA, regarding the creation of the LSB platform. Vishnevsky shared that the goals of both a proclamation and LSB are the same. When asked whether LSB holds the same weight as a proclamation, Vishnevsky stated, “the voting proportions of the letter are much bigger than that of the proclamation, and since the letter is coming directly from the student body without interference from the SGA, the ‘Letter from the Student Body’ should hold very significant weight to its recipient.”
The Stute also had the opportunity to speak with James and Mohamed, the two proposers of the SDFWI letter. At their request, only their first names are used in this article. When asked about the contents of the letter, James shared that the letter outlined the same divestment criteria as the SDFWI proposal that was previously submitted to the SGA along with the SDFWI proclamation. With regard to why they opted to use the LSB instead of pushing for a proclamation again, James said that LSB allowed them to represent a broader opinion of the student body which, in their opinion, the SGA Senate did not accurately represent. James shared that they are very grateful both to the SGA and all those who supported the effort to get the letter passed.
The voting process was facilitated by the SGA. Voting was open for two weeks and concluded on Monday, April 28. According to the campus-wide email sent out by the SGA, out of 4,236 undergraduate students, a total of 733 students participated, exceeding the 10% threshold of at least 423. The voting breakdown is as follows:
Total Valid Votes Submitted: 733 students (17% of 4,236 students)
Votes In Favor: 599 students (82% of 733 students)
Votes Against: 120 students (16% of 733 students)
Votes Abstaining: 14 students (2% of 733 students)
While this letter had many supporters, there were also those who spoke out against it. Members of the Stevens’ Jewish community feel that the SDFWI movement is exclusionary due to the original statement’s perceived disproportionate mention of Israel. While the writers amended the wording of the original proposal and proclamation, several students raised concerns about the underlying intentions, despite Israel no longer being directly mentioned.
Maeryn Erdheim, a representative of Stevens’ Jewish community through her role as Hillel’s President, criticized the letter’s resemblance to the contents of the previous proclamation, and expressed concern that the “all or nothing language” of both documents does not reflect the full range of student perspectives.
While a University response has yet to appear, this letter is the first to pass through the newly created LSB system, setting a unique—if contentious—inauguration of institutional student advocacy in the Stevens community.
