To the Pomona College community,
As an alumnus and former head chair of the Pomona College Judicial Council (JBoard), I write with a heavy heart and deep concern for the future of Pomona. In my role as chair, I resisted every urge to interject my thoughts into the public domain. I felt that doing so would undermine the impartiality and perceived legitimacy of our student-led conduct process. Yet as I have reflected on President G. Gabrielle Starr’s decision to circumvent the judicial process this past week, I feel compelled to break my silence and speak out for the values that define us as a community.
During my tenure as chair, I witnessed firsthand how polarizing disagreements threatened to tear at the fabric of our community. Yet even in our most contentious cases — the protests of Dec. 2023 and Apr. 5, 2024 — the integrity of our judicial process bridged divides, earning respect from both administration and the student body despite neither being fully satisfied with our decisions.
We evaluated responsibility by weighing objective evidence against the letter of our Student Code. When those factors pointed to no one clear conclusion, we sought middle ground by fostering a nonjudgmental space to register each side’s interpretation of the facts. In cases where responsibility was indeed determined, we issued sanctions that aimed to recognize and restore, rather than aggravate, the harm incurred by each party. This was trying work — intellectually, emotionally, even socially — for our panelists and my fellow chairs. But we pressed forward, determined to lead by the power of our example, not by making an example of our power.
The right to protest — and the courage to advocate for one’s convictions — lie at the foundation of both our democratic society and Pomona’s educational mission. However, without real stakes and accountability, acts of disruptive protest amount to little more than performance. By bypassing our established channels for mutual accountability instead of affirming them, Starr’s approach betrays our institution’s mandate to model critical discourse and thoughtful leadership. It represents precisely the kind of governance driven by fear and political expediency, rather than principle, that our student-led judicial process was designed to prevent.
Starr’s actions mark a profound departure from the values that have long distinguished Pomona and attracted generations of thoughtful leaders. Instead of championing constructive pathways for student advocacy, her administration offers only token gestures — ad hoc forums hastily convened in reaction to disruptive protests — that effectively reward continued escalation. As an experienced educator and leader, she bears the responsibility to embrace her students’ conviction, model resilient dialogue and draw strength from our community’s diverse perspectives. These principles, embodied in our judicial processes, reflect the fundamental promise of our liberal arts education.
The grave implications of circumventing our judicial process cannot be overstated. This decision not only invalidates years of dedicated work by students and administrators, but reveals Starr’s vision for Pomona: governance by hierarchy rather than community. Through their silence, the Board of Trustees has tacitly endorsed President Starr’s decision to discard our time-tested processes of collaborative resolution. They owe our community an explanation.
By depriving students of the opportunity to have their voices heard by a jury of their peers, those who seek to be heard may see no choice but to turn to more confrontational forms of protest. The choice before us is clear: we can either recommit to our proven judicial process, or we can brace for increasingly volatile conflicts that will only further fracture our community.
In solidarity,
Henri Prevost PO ’24
Chair Emeritus, Pomona College Judicial Council