On Jan. 29, the Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) Legislative Council (LC) convened to discuss a new motion proposed by SSMU President Dymetri Taylor. The motion seeks several amendments to the SSMU Constitution—the Society’s fundamental governing document, which outlines SSMU’s roles as the governing body of McGill undergraduates and serves as its legal by-law regarding its status as a non-profit corporation under the Quebec government. 

The meeting began with Executive and Councillor reports. During Vice-President (VP) University Affairs Susan Aloudat’s report, Science Councillor Benjamin Yu inquired into McGill’s proposed Identification Policy for Access to Properties Owned, Occupied, or Used by the University, which was presented to the McGill Senate on Jan. 14. 

Though Aloudat assured the LC that the Senate had serious concerns with the proposed policy—which would empower unspecified, authorized personnel to request anyone on university grounds to provide McGill or government-issued identification and remove facial coverings—she expressed her belief that the proposed policy would nonetheless pass the Senate and move to the Board of Directors (BoD). Still, she intimated that the policy would undergo reforms before its ultimate implementation. 

“I do think that [the Senate is] going to reimagine [the policy], especially for considerations like certain groups who will be experiencing [on-demand identification] disproportionately, who are on campus for perfectly legitimate and academic affairs,” Aloudat said. “[McGill should put] […] guardrails around when this policy will be used, so that it’s only applied and enacted in situations where security is a genuine threat or risk, and not a ‘perceived’ risk or arbitrarily interpreted risk.” 

Also during Aloudat’s report, Arts Councillor Delaney Cahill inquired into SSMU’s policy that grants undergraduates access to Grammarly, a writing-assistant software powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI). Cahill stated that members of the Faculty of Arts professoriate are concerned that SSMU is providing undergraduates with access to AI tools that could be used to undermine academic integrity.

“Some of the [Faculty of Arts] teachers weren’t thrilled about [undergraduate access to Grammarly] and […] the SSMU prompting the students to use Grammarly and AI in general,” Cahill noted. “What is the SSMU doing to combat […] unethical AI use right now?”

While Aloudat stated that it was not her duty to police undergraduates’ use of AI, Taylor later clarified that the generative AI features in Grammarly are unavailable to undergraduates.

Taylor then presented the newly proposed motion, which seeks to amend the SSMU Constitution to, among other initiatives, further empower the LC, change specific terminology, combat the politicization of the BoD, and specify the roles and powers of Board and Executive Council members. 

One of the amendments would change the constitution’s nomenclature, replacing the current designation “Board of Directors” with the name “College of Directors.” Taylor explained that part of the rationale for this amendment is that “College of Directors” has a more positive connotation than its current name. 

“[The current designation] gives the impression that the Society is more of a corporation than a student society,” Taylor said. “That is the current way in which we are structured [….] We are both [a non-profit] company and a student society, […] but principally the change […] [from] ‘Board’ to ‘College,’ […] more or less presents an opportunity for the Board to be considered into a better light than how the Board has been viewed in previous times.”

Similarly, Taylor indicated that amendments to increase the LC’s oversight over the BoD and its subgroup, the Executive Council, were necessary in light of past political polarization within the Board. 

“[In the past] executives might tap [individuals] because they want to get people that are like-minded to them onto the Board,” Taylor said. “[It served as] a way for the executives […] to then be able to have their vision [of the BoD] be the one that goes forward without necessarily getting the broad perspective that you otherwise get in as a council.” 

Taylor mentioned how, rather than focusing on legal, financial, and operational duties,  the BoD has gradually and strategically begun to shape what SSMU achieves.

“With the board now and with the way it’s currently structured, for instance, for our job contracts, I’m overseeing the executives, which doesn’t make any sense at all,” Taylor said. “There can be interpersonal issues that arise [….] That’s what this [amendment] is trying to navigate, as well as to also ensure executive accountability.”

Ultimately, the motion was tabled. If passed by the LC and a student referendum, it would be implemented on May 4. 

Moment of the meeting:

Arts Senator Keith Baybayon and VP University Affairs Susan Aloudat discussed potential accommodations to address McGill’s 2026 Spring Convocation dates and the conflicts it imposes on Muslim graduates celebrating Eid al-Adha.

Soundbite: 

“The Faculty of Music throws the best bars out of every single faculty! You can quote me on that, Tribune!” —VP External Seraphina Crema-Black, regarding the Music Councillor’s report on the success of the Music Undergraduate Students’ Association holiday party.