When they are put into evidence, could they then become public record?

Join the club.

It was what and how it was said in that letter that has many GLOs concerned. Simply put that a GLO can be kicked off campus for conducting "their" (the GLO's) internal business when it may not have been in violation of any university policy.

I don't rightly know. But I'm sure there is something legal between the university and GLOs. My guess is that it might be something as simple as allowing the chapter to govern itself as long as the chapter does not break any university, city, state or federal laws etc.

No. It might have been a long time ago, but it isn't now. I'm sure the ladies of Delta Zeta know they most likely won't have a celebration. Even in victory. This is more about Delta Zeta having the right to govern and make their own policy regarding membership. And clearing their name.

(Please note that I am not advocating for Delta Zeta or necessarily supporting any of their positions. Simply presenting what appears to be their case.)

Not yet.

I hope Delta Zeta HQ is smart enough to provide Delta Chapter with guidance and support on how to respond to the media.

At this point, it doesn't seem to be about wanting a a chapter at DePauw but about what the university said about Delta Zeta in their statements and about how Delta Zeta conducts their internal business.

I would guess (and hope) that Delta Zeta would claim ritual (membership selection) to be privileged information. And anything related to ritual as well.

If that was to happen, my guess is that the records would most likely be sealed.

Can you imagine the thought process that went into deciding to sue DePauw?

"Okay sisters, we look terrible nationally and publicly right now. How do we fix this?"
"Well we could just let this slide but I mean, Delta is our second oldest chapter. How could DePauw just kick us off? God they're so mean!"
"I know! They made us look so bad! They're such meanies!"
"I have an idea. It's brilliant and crazy and it will work! We'll sue them for making us look bad! That will clear our name and make the public hate DePauw instead!"
"That's inspired! Let's do it!"

I wonder if that would fly considering that Delta Zeta is claiming they have no such discrimination policies actual or implied. As Depauw's attorney I would think such information on membership selection would be pertinent to the case. I'd ask for everything they have under the moon, back a big old Rider truck up to their HQ and say load it up. But then I'm not an attorney so I get to make it up as I go!

I agree. But from what I understand of this case, Delta Zeta is saying they followed - or were within - university guidelines etc.

And again, my feeling is that if Delta Zeta is willing to go public like this, there might be merit to their case.

Since I am NPHC this whole concept of such high minimum numbers for a chapter is foreign to me. I bet there is another thread on this and if so could someone direct me to it.

This whole scenario could not happen in a NPHC org. I mean folx may be suspended or even expelled for hazing and other violations, but not because the chapter is struggling for members.

And it is interesting to me that the local pan-hel decides on who is invited to expand, because at my school (yeah way back then) DST was denied admittance by the University because there were no houses available, so there would be no addition sororities or fraternities.

Once our then national president (who had come to speak on campus as the first African American commissioner of civil rights) explained that we do not require houses, then the University changed its mind, and the rest of the NPHC was admitted on campus (only Kappa, Alpha and AKA had existed formally in houses, and all three ended up giving them up, because they didn't want to be restricted to the houses.)

We had existed there as part of another nearby chapter, but then we were able to get our own charter.

I thought Delta Zeta already made public certain membership policies with respect to discrimination. Most GLOs have their policies "out there" and available to the public. The whole "We do not discriminate based on..."

Just because they have that statement on their website does not neccessarily mean it is adhered to everywhere (and that's for everyone, not just DZ chapters).

Since membership selection is private and so is the "business" that each GLO conducts, who's to say Suzie Q didn't get into XYZ because of her race, weight, dress size, or how popular she is with the guys? She might be involved in lots of things on campus and someone can say she'd be too busy to be commited to the chapter and that could be it and use that as an excuse to not put her on bid lists or to put her on the "Congratulations! You're a great sister and you can live the rest of your collegiate life as an alumna with all the rights and privilages of an active sister.... except you can't wear letters or come by the house" list

I am not an expert but one of the things I got out of my higher education law class was that if you don't protect your rights, they can be taken away. Yeah, its true--DZ may suffer in numbers or reputation by pursuing this suit. And as an administrator, I would be hesitant about bringing a group to campus that was known for suing another school.

But I wonder--wouldn't it be worse if we, GLOs, lost the right to decide who our members are? Wouldn't it be worse if we didn't have a right to be autonomous and run our organizations by our own values? (This is also why many orgs are resistant to university efforts for values congruence relationship statements etc.)

We need to protect our rights.

Agree 100%.

Well said!

Actually I had one mother who works with me come and see me a few months ago because her daughter had just accepted a bid at another school in Indiana and she was worried that maybe she should counsel her daughter to de-pledge because of this. She knew I was in a sorority and wanted my opinion. While I said I thought it was no big deal in the long run and I was sure her daughter would be fine, I found it sad that the mother's first national exposure to her daughter's sorority was this. That is where I can see this effecting DZ's numbers... if parents caution against DZ due to the media.

There are plenty of attorneys who would take a case of this type whether it has a chance in hell of succeeding in any way or not -- publicity, exposure, and $$$.

I really thought the powers that be at DZ couldn't look like bigger assholes than they did when this whole thing blew up. I clearly was wrong. Where are the normal, cool DZ members now and what are they doing about this? I would be LIVID.