Yale suspends Bushes' fraternity for sexist chants

[indygphib]

NEW HAVEN, Conn. – A prestigious Yale fraternity that counts both Bush presidents among its alumni is being banned from recruiting and holding activities on campus for five years after pledges were ordered to chant obscenities against women.

Full Article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110517/...ale_fraternity

[33girl]

I doubt very much the fraternity will suspend this chapter. They'll continue to operate off campus.

[Psi U MC Vito]

But will they still have students who want to join? Doesn't a private school have the right to expel students who join non-sanctioned groups?

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

But will they still have students who want to join? Doesn't a private school have the right to expel students who join non-sanctioned groups?

DKE won a court case on this I believe. They can't expel them for that any more than they can expel them for joining the Aryan Nation or Amnesty International.

[Psi U MC Vito]

^^^ Interesting. I did not know that private schools were so limited.

[MysticCat]

Maybe it's just me, but was it really necessary to headline this as "Bushes' fraternity"? Yes, I know the press loves to pick up on the fact that both President Bushes are members of this chapter, and I know DKE loves to mention it as well. But there does seem to be an unseemly suggestion of guilt by association.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Maybe it's just me, but was it really necessary to headline this as "Bushes' fraternity"? Yes, I know the press loves to pick up on the fact that both President Bushes are members of this chapter, and I know DKE loves to mention it as well. But there does seem to be an unseemly suggestion of guilt by association.

It's not just you.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

^^^ Interesting. I did not know that private schools were so limited.

Neither private nor public schools can violate your right to freely associate...

[Low C Sharp]

Neither private nor public schools can violate your right to freely associate...

I don't think that's right. Just as an example, religious schools kick people out all the time for exercising First Amendment rights that break religious tenets. Observe BYU punishing its basketball player who admitted to "associating" with his girlfriend.

Yale certainly will not expel students for joining an off-campus DKE chapter. But if it wanted to, it probably could.
________
LIVE SEX WEBSHOWS

[sweetmagnolia]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

I don't think that's right. Just as an example, religious schools kick people out all the time for exercising First Amendment rights that break religious tenets. Observe BYU punishing its basketball player who admitted to "associating" with his girlfriend.

Yale certainly will not expel students for joining an off-campus DKE chapter. But if it wanted to, it probably could.

BYU students sign an honor code that states they will not engage in premarital sex, etc. It's not just some clause in the student handbook.

Also, jezebel has posted on this now. "Shut down all GLOs!" in 3...2...1...

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Maybe it's just me, but was it really necessary to headline this as "Bushes' fraternity"? Yes, I know the press loves to pick up on the fact that both President Bushes are members of this chapter, and I know DKE loves to mention it as well. But there does seem to be an unseemly suggestion of guilt by association.

I thought that too. The Bushes have nothing to do with this story and should have been at least left off the title. I don't know that it was even necessary to mention it in the actual article, but it would have been better than in the title.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

I don't think that's right. Just as an example, religious schools kick people out all the time for exercising First Amendment rights that break religious tenets. Observe BYU punishing its basketball player who admitted to "associating" with his girlfriend.

Yale certainly will not expel students for joining an off-campus DKE chapter. But if it wanted to, it probably could.

First off, sex =/= association. And students would have to sign an 'honor code' ala BYU or Liberty University. Even then I don't know of any clauses in those that prohibit free association. Such schools might ban groups they disagree with - Liberty banned the College Democrats IIRC - but I've seen none that cross that line. Military might be the only situation where such lines are in place perhaps?

(And really, sex is not a first amendment right. Honor codes are dumb, but come on.)

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Neither private nor public schools can violate your right to freely associate...

I'm going to have to disagree, at least to a degree.. The right to freely associate is, in the US, a component of the right to free speech -- a constitutional right that the government is prohibited from violating. A private entity, such as a private college, cannot be sued for violating a constitutional right because the Constitution only deals with the power (and limitations on power) of the government. It has nothing to do with the relationships between private entities (such as students and private schools).

To the extent that a private college might legally have to respect free speech/freedom of association rights, it comes through another channel, such as civil rights laws or conditions for receipt of federal funds. In the case of a private college with religious affiliation, such free speech/freedom of association rights may have to be balanced with free exercise of religion rights of the school.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I'm going to have to disagree, at least to a degree.. The right to freely associate is, in the US, a component of the right to free speech -- a constitutional right that the government is prohibited from violating. A private entity, such as a private college, cannot be sued for violating a constitutional right because the Constitution only deals with the power (and limitations on power) of the government. It has nothing to do with the relationships between private entities (such as students and private schools).

To the extent that a private college might legally have to respect free speech/freedom of association rights, it comes through another channel, such as civil rights laws or conditions for receipt of federal funds. In the case of a private college with religious affiliation, such free speech/freedom of association rights may have to be balanced with free exercise of religion rights of the school.

That's what I thought was the case. A lot of people forget how limited the bill of rights actually is. Would Yale have the right to expel anybody who still chooses to join DKE during this time period?

[sweetmagnolia]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

That's what I thought was the case. A lot of people forget how limited the bill of rights actually is. Would Yale have the right to expel anybody who still chooses to join DKE during this time period?

I would think not, since the chapter would technically not be on campus, and Yale is going to severely limit the extent to which they can use the name Yale in whatever they do. Also, from what I read yesterday, Nationals has placed them under temporary...sanctions of sorts. For the time being they are not allowed to take on any new pledges, which kind of/temporarily solves the problem (of if a student would face expulsion for joining). If their HQ doesn't suspend them but the campus has, I'm not sure what happens.