While we understand the anger and frustration that Eric Pasternack must feel after being removed as the popularly elected executive president of the Student Government Association (SGA) for violating the College’s alcohol policy, we question the timing of his lawsuit against the school for depriving him of what he has termed his “right to serve as executive president.”
The Student Leadership Criterium, evaluated every 3 years by SGA, call for executive board members of any student organization to “be free of probation” in its various forms throughout the College’s judiciary system. From the most minor infraction to severe breaches, student leaders can be plucked from their positions.
While it makes sense for student leaders to be held to certain academic standards (they must maintain a GPA of at least 2.0) the same as student athletes, we do not think that ones personal life is a terribly good indicator of ones leadership ability.
Nor do we believe that student leaders should be punished for behavior common to the broad cross section of college-age people across the country.
But at the same time, with the College facing an unprecedented budget crisis, we encourage Pasternack to rethink his decision to take the school to court.
If he did have the best interests of the student body first and foremost in his mind – as one who hopes to effectively carry out the duties of SGA executive president must – one would think saving the college money in legal fees and court costs, would take priority over serving as executive president.