"UVA fourth-year Blake Marvin and Assistant Dean of Students David Bynes initiated a case against the 17 "living wage" student protesters (arrested April 15 after a four-day sit-in in Madison Hall failed to secure $10.72 an hour for UVA's lowest paid employees). Marvin's s complaint to the University Judiciary Committee cited the students' unauthorized entry into a UVA facility, intentional disruption or obstruction of operations [at UVA] and failure to comply with directions of UVA officials - all violations of the Student Code of Conduct.

"The students in this case went beyond the realm of constitutionally protected free speech," Marvin said during the trial for sanction on May 2. He added, "The University must not allow these actions to become precedent." At least three of the five-judge committee found the students guilty. Although the University Judiciary Committee has the power to sanction students with a variety of punishments, including expulsion, it imposed a less draconian sentence: Protesters must "apologize and thank" the UVA Police Department and the five employees "disrupted" by the protest in writing (minimum word count: 250, due no later than May 15). The students must also thank (in no less than 500 words) UVA administrators for "their willingness to facilitate dialogue during the sit-in." But the sanctions imposed have yet to affect the students' ongoing efforts--negotiations between the activists and UVA officials continue unabated.

The UJC proceedings demonstrated how serious UVA takes its Jeffersonian lineage, as student attorneys clad in sleek suits acted out the formal procedures of a civil case. The trial, run and initiated by students, labored through judicial procedures. Student attorneys struggled with legalese, making improper objections and failing to object when appropriate, and leading witness during examination. Anxious about courtroom outbursts, UJC members practiced due diligence, screening the courtroom audience for troublemakers and relegating potential dissidents to a separate room, one floor below, where a live feed of the trial was broadcast. The committee also positioned two UVA police officers, one for each room, to "ensure the safety of all the students" (and pre-empt any unruliness inspired by the trial or its verdict). These pre-emptive security measures proved unnecessary. The convicted protesters maintain that this was also the case on April 14 and 15, when UVA administrators called upon UVA police to quell the student's self-proclaimed act of civil disobedience." (Amy Kniss, C-VILLE Weekly, May 9 - 15, 2006)