• The Committee declined two cases on May 2, the first focusing onSashiRolls and the second relating toFuture Perfect at Sunrise. It also declineda dispute over bad music.
• Last month, the Arbitration Committee openedWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Enigmaman. On May 6 the case was closed, withEnigmaman being desysopped.
• The Committee ends the month with two open cases:Rama andCanadian politics.

As of publication, the Committee has four open requests for clarification or amendment:a request for clarification regarding Palestine–Israel articles,a request for clarification regarding BLP issues on British politics articles,an amendment request relating to DS alerts, andan amendment request regarding Arbitration Enforcement decisions.

This month,BU Rob13decided to step down from the Arbitration Committee, as well as "semi-retire" from Wikipedia as a whole. On a brighter note,Bradv wasappointed as a full clerk of the Committee. Thebot that they have created,ArbClerkBot, was alsoapproved by theBot Approvals Group.

In the aftermath of the Committee's amendment to its standard provision for appeals and modifications,Ivanvectordecided to resign as a checkuser.

Both BU Rob13 and Ivanvector have written essays related to their decisions:

• User:BU Rob13/AGF applies to everyone – BU Rob13 reminds editors that they should alsoassume good faith on the part of the Arbitration Committee
• User:Ivanvector/2019 Arbitration Committee protest – Ivanvector is officially protesting the Arbitration Committee

• It's worth noting that the essay I wrote was written wellbefore my resignation, and did not make up a majority of my reason for resigning. ~Rob₁₃^Talk16:15, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• You don't have to tell us, but if you are willing to, we would all like to know the reasons. Even a vague overview like "80% personal reasons" or "50% disagreement with certain directions the committees is going" or "if you refuse to use the oxford comma, I refuse to work with you" would be interesting. Just a suggestion. "I choose to get into my reasons" is fine too. --Guy Macon (talk)18:06, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I do not think it would be particularly productive to share my reasons, so I'm declining to do so. The only things I've said/will say is that it's not personal, and that the community's conduct toward arbitrators has played a role (though a minority one) in my decision-making. ~Rob₁₃^Talk04:39, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]