Students loaded with 18 credits and part-time jobs understand the concept of organizing their priorities. And in light of her recent nomination to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Penn State Board of Trustees Chairwoman Cynthia Baldwin may have to take a lesson on the importance of prioritizing.

The Penn State Board of Trustees has the unique mission of protecting the interests of the university and its students, faculty and staff members. As chairwoman, Baldwin has been elected to lead this group and protect the welfare of the Penn State.

However, her recent nomination to fill a vacancy on the state Supreme Court raises the issue of how she could effectively serve in both capacities?

Although Baldwin is definitely qualified to assume a position as a state Supreme Court justice, her responsibilities to this university should come first. With such important duties as determining university goals, approving policies and authorizing the annual budget, Board of Trustees members are vital to the operation of Penn State.

If she is approved, Baldwin's position on the court could become a conflict of interest. If any type of case involving Penn State were to reach the state Supreme Court, how could she remain impartial?

And because Penn State is the largest land-grant institution in the state, Baldwin can not pretend cases involving this university will not reach the court.

There is still an appeal to the Supreme Court pending that involves the university's decision to withhold the top administrator's salaries from the public.

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruled in favor of the public's right to know on Aug. 12.

Penn State filed an appeal to the state Supreme Court and is still waiting on its decision to hear the case. Other recent issues involving academic freedom -- the appropriateness of students and teachers voicing personal views in the classroom -- could very well reach the court.

If Baldwin is approved and accepts the position, she would have no choice but to recuse herself from her duties as a justice if such a case came before her. However, there is no guarantee that Baldwin wouldn't have influence over the court, and even the possibility of impropriety should make her realize she can't do both.