LOL

This lawsuit will not hurt AKA's reputation.

They've survived worse - lawsuit, no lawsuit.

The only hurt reputations out of this are the ladies and their moms. After a while it should have been obvious to the ladies that the chapter did not want them. They just should have dropped it and moved on with their lives.

Let's say they do win, and obtain membership in the org. I would imagine that they would be greatly shunned by the members. So what - you're in, you have the letters and pin, but no one will talk to you, no one wants you in their chapter. They would be AKAs in name only. I seriously doubt they would have the positive emotional connections and sisterhood they would like to have.

I suspect that the chapter did not want to deal with the lunacy of these ladies. The chapter had every right to reject them, but based on the article the chapter may have handled it wrong. The chapter should not have toyed with them and strung them along.

I'm with everyone else in thinking that this is a frivolous lawsuit. I really hope the ladies don't win.

I'm surprised! Usually, family members who was injured in hazing or died in hazing are the one that filed cases in the sorority of violating human rights.

Lawsuits for violations of "human rights" as such are, in my experience at least, rare in American jurisprudence. I was actually surprised (well, maybe not really) to see that there is (maybe) a basis for such a claim in DC.

Lawsuits for violations of constitutional rights or civil rights are, of course, another matter.

But lawsuits by those injured in hazing or by the families of those who died as a result of hazing are typically going to be in tort, not for violation of "human rights."

Aside from the fact that I agree with everyone else that this whole thing is ridiculous, if for some reason the court was to rule in their favor and allow them to join because of their legacy status, wouldn't non-legacies then be able to sue based on their human rights being violated because of their "familial status" of not having an AKA in their family?

You need to know the mentality behind the lawsuit.

1. They are not suing because they were hazed. They are suing because they were hazed and did not get in. In their minds they did all that "work" and they did not gain membership. Had they gained membership after being hazed they would not have sued.

2. Why they think it is a human rights issue - They were probably raised to think, since birth, that they are to be AKAs. I'm sure their moms in some way made sure these ladies (as children) we part of the "right" social group growing up, and were seen and participated in the "right" functions and activities, all with respect to the AfAm community. This was part of their grooming and preparation to become AKA.

I suspect along the way these moms told their girls that they have the right to live where they want, be anything they want to be, the right to vote, and oh, yes, the "right" to become an AKA.

To compound this issue, they wanted to join AKA through the 100+ yr old Alpha chapter, and in addition to that, a chapter at a HBCU.

---------

This lawsuit is really about those ladies and their moms saving face.

I was reading the comments on that article and they were saying Howard puts a maximum on the number of pledges a group can take and that many many times that number come out as interests. That is a lot like what NPC groups have to go through especially at schools where there are a lot of legacies. Isn't it unusual for NPHC chapters to have a maximum put on them like that? I obviously understand if that can't be answered since I don't want any secret information revealed. I never had heard of a school putting limits down like that.

No, its not unusual for NPHC orgs to put a cap on their chapter membership. One other HBCU that I know has a cap of 50 incoming members. Putting a cap on membership just helps to control numbers. Much like the quota system of NPC.

Again, you have to understand the mentality behind this. In the AfAm community, the idea is that if you pledge a NPHC org at a HBCU, then you will get the "real" pledging experience. There is more significance to joining NPHC orgs at HBCUs than PWIs.

And, there is more significance in joining a NPHC org as an undergrad vs. grad (alumnae) member.

So, the ideal way of joining is as an undergrad at a HBCU. For this case in particular, joining the Alpha chapter was just the ultimate way of joining.

So this was Howard putting the cap on membership, not AKA? I didn't know that the schools had any pull with regard to intake (outside of "you can't bring in any new members").

OK I think I got it. Would a school like Howard with a long history and many alumnae be likely to have more legacies looking to join than spots available?

Howard is like the Ole Miss/Bama of HBCUs (with regard to this topic).

From the one HBCU that I know of, yes, the school put a cap on membership.

Yeah that's what I was getting at. The NPC limits the number we can take with quotas so we can't take all the legacies if there are more than that. In this case it is the school doing the limiting but if you have 100 legacies and 50 spots that's obviously not going to work so some people are always going to be mighty upset.

Anyone have a link to the Complaint?