Line Caps
 

Should a university be able to tell an organization how many members they may accept? In BGLOs, this is known informally as a "line cap."

I know NPC orgs have something similar.... I forget the term.

Has any NIC org heard of this?


I don't agree with a university telling an organization how many members they can take. I think it penalizes the organizations -- why be punished if your org is doing everything right and attracts more qualified people than the rest?

I know NPC members have a different philosophy on this generally, so please understand that essentially I'm not talking to you, LOL. Love you, though! LOL..... but seriously, NPC members can respond if they want.

(PS - I am aware that there is another thread on this topic, but I wanted a greater breadth of contemporary responses from NPHC and non-NPHC members.)

I've always wondered what the reasons were for university imposed caps. What are they trying to control?

Quota (During Rush # you can take, regardless of your total #)/Total (The number you can COB up to if you're under)

Does the university determine this # or does the local NPC come up with the #?

The local NPC, based on "Green Book" guidelines and campus history.

I don't know if a PUBLIC university can force a cap - due to freedom of association rules, but I think a private university can do whatever it wants in that regard.

Glad to see you back, and congratulations. :)

I have always wondered what they were trying to control as well. I could understand BETTER if the "quota" (thanks AlphaFrog!) was set to ten or 15, but when you set the line cap at 75 and make it an NPHC-wide rule, it really ever only affects two organizations. And that's no slight to ANY other NPHC organization, but it just seems like if your org has 300-400 interested girls and you can only pick 75, that's just not fair.

And if your org has a legacy stipulation, then you're really screwed.

Interesting.

As a slight tangent..... I know that Title IX affects just about all universities, public and private, because the great majority have students on some kind of federal financial aid program.

I wonder if freedom of association could be applied to private universities for the same reason/loophole.

Well aren't our organizations allowed on campus at the leisure of the univ./college?

I'm sure I've read that at a public uni. they can't deny your right to be there, but they can make it as difficult as possible to get recognition, etc...

A private u doesn't have to recognize GLOs (or any organization). However, if they deny their students the right to belong to an organization that meets off campus, that's where they get into Freedom of Association trouble.

Short answer -- no.

Gotcha. I was just thinking that since our membership isn't open to all students (meaning you have to be more than just a degree seeking student) they could deny our presence.

I honestly just don't see why the university would care. I can understand why the organizations themselves would impose restrictions, but not the university. I don't see schools doing that with other types of student groups, so what's the justification?

Which is one of the reasons we don't have a legacy stipulation. ;)

The cap thing is interesting. I know Howard use to put a cap of 50 on a line (and maybe they have reinstated that,) but it didn't seem a problem because Alpha Chapter didn't select that many anyway--on their own.

IMO if you are as selective as you should be, then a cap does not matter.

I don't think university caps make sense unless it is about the scarcity of resources or something of that nature.

I definitely think Delta should have line caps. :D

i promise i will get back in my lane, but i love this statement:

If they told us to only take a certain number of pledges, we would probably take twice that just to show the Admin what's up. I think that would apply for most chapters on my campus. Just an extra reason for us to recruit. Actually, we'd probably sue them.

The rationale that I have heard about a line cap is that it is done to 'even out' the number of members in each org. Personally, I think it is a moot point because if a person wants to be a XYZ and they don't make it in undergrad, then they can wait and try again for grad - the person will still have an opportunity to be a member.

As far as having 300 people interested in your org, that is great. But I can be very sure that the org will probably not want all of those 300 people. It is better to be as selective as possible.

The NIC does not advocate caps - i.e. chapter totals or rush (intake) quotas - at all. However, the NIC defers to the campus IFC regarding rush/membership. As such, a few campuses (I know of only three, but I'm sure there may be more) have (or had) some sort of cap in place. As I recall, all three caps were regarding some type of rush (intake) quota. Now for what it is worth, an individual fraternity and/or chapter might have some sort of self imposed cap.

To begin with, I am NOT a lawyer (nor would I want too be, too complicated) but I have taken a few educational law classes dealing with campus and school issues.


Based on my ed law class you're right Senusret. If a school (public or private) takes federal money, they gotta follow federal law. The only difference is privates do not HAVE to take federal money, but if they choose to then they have to follow federal law.

Part of the issue of freedom of association also deals with if you are secluding a segment of the population. For example, if there are 10 NPC's on a campus and the school does not allow a 11th NPC to get oncampus it's okay, because that segment is being covered legally. The issue would be if the uni has 10 NPC's on campus but does not allow a NPHC sorority. That is a segment of society you are not covering, yet you are not allowing them on campus.

I also believe that freedom of association is mainly used in cases dealing with religious groups. Having a campus crusade, but not allowing a jewish student union for example.

What style? :D

No, that's really a little too broad. Laws like Title IX specifically state that compliance with them is a prerequisite to receipt of federal funds. So, if a school violates the provisions of Title IX, that school risks forfeiting federal money.

Freedom of Association however is a constitutional right that applies only to the government. The rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights have been construed to include a right of association, which the federal government cannot infringe upon. The Fourteenth Amendment extends that to the state governments, including state (public) schools.

But AlphaFrog is right -- there is a difference between prohibiting association in Greek groups and recognizing GLOs. A public university cannot tell you what organizations you can or can't belong to. But a public university can decide not to recognize Greek life on campus, as long as it does do across the board.

Both of examples issues deal more with equal protection of the laws than freedom of association. I've seen freedom of association arise most frequently in a political context -- association with people of similar political philosophies.

From my understanding we (not just AKA, but most campus orgs) are at the university as a privilege and they can give us the boot at any time at their discretion no questions asked. That doesent mean we won't exist, but not to the university. We can still attend school there just not hold functions on campus or identify with the university.

It's funny that you mention this. I was looking at Bowdoin yesterday and they actually have a Social Code dealing with membership in exlusionary organizations. Since 1997, Bowdoin students cannot join fraternities, sororities, or any group that excludes on the basis of gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, etc. (Student memberships were completely phased out by 2000.) I wonder of any student has joined any such organization and been brought up to a judicial committee.