This article discusses the pros and cons of "involuntary withdrawals" in cases of students who are at risk of suicide. A June, 2005, Massachusetts Superior Court summary judgment ruling in the case of "Shin v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)" concluded that MIT administrators owed a duty of care to suicide victim, Elizabeth Shin, who had been under the care of MIT mental health professionals at the time of her death. The settlement in this case raised the question of whether or not students at risk of suicide should be dismissed, preferably on medical grounds. An earlier ruling in "Jain v. State of Iowa" had concluded that the university had no legal duty to act in a similar situation. An alternative to mandatory medical withdrawal policies can be found in the "Illinois Plan," which treats suicide threats as threats of violence, which may then be sanctioned through a campus disciplinary system (or an administrative equivalent) after appropriate due process. The Illinois program is grounded on the philosophical premise that students have no right to threaten or inflict violence, including violence against themselves. The author suggests that some variation of this systematic, campus-wide approach, coupled with efforts to identify students with symptoms of depression, educate faculty members and other gatekeepers about warning signs of suicide, and reduce the stigma of seeking professional help should be core elements of college suicide prevention programs nationwide.