Delta Zeta Reportedly Sues DePauw

[texas*princess]

Originally Posted by PenguinTrax

I find it interesting that the only thing on the DZ web site is information about this debacle. It is like this is their sole reason for existence now. Sad.

Yes it is really sad.

They can post a whole page about how they are trying to sue the pants off of DePauw, but they can only write a tiny 1-inch blurb about how they "are sorry for any hurt feelings" the reorg may have caused their own sisters.

[exlurker]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

Yes it is really sad. They can post a whole page about how they are trying to sue the pants off of DePauw, but they can only write a tiny 1-inch blurb about how they "are sorry for any hurt feelings" the reorg may have caused their own sisters.

The executive director of DZ recently did an interview or question-and-answer thingy with USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/educati...sorority_N.htm

[SWTXBelle]

As I understand it, DePauw did not have an official policy regarding releasing GLO members from their housing until AFTER the DZ incident. While no one condones the members being forced out on short notice, it should be noted that this was not against any University policy at the time it happened. Please correct me if I am wrong.
It is possible to do something which is WRONG, but not, for lack of a better term, illegal. DePauw also has a procedure in place to deal with both students and organizations which are in violation of university policies, and to the best of my knowledge they did not follow this in their handling of DZ.
No one looks good in this mess, but we need to distinguish between actions which we disapprove of and actions which may be illegal or in violation of established policies. The legal battle will be decided on a different criteria than the PR battle.
I think an important issue is whether or not an organization has the right to be boneheaded about handling their membership selection. As we've seen in the PR war, it carries its own penalty, without the University lifting a finger.
I imagine the next DZ convention will be far more interesting than most.

[ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

As I understand it, DePauw did not have an official policy regarding releasing GLO members from their housing until AFTER the DZ incident. While no one condones the members being forced out on short notice, it should be noted that this was not against any University policy at the time it happened. Please correct me if I am wrong.
It is possible to do something which is WRONG, but not, for lack of a better term, illegal. DePauw also has a procedure in place to deal with both students and organizations which are in violation of university policies, and to the best of my knowledge they did not follow this in their handling of DZ.
No one looks good in this mess, but we need to distinguish between actions which we disapprove of and actions which may be illegal or in violation of established policies. The legal battle will be decided on a different criteria than the PR battle.
I think an important issue is whether or not an organization has the right to be boneheaded about handling their membership selection. As we've seen in the PR war, it carries its own penalty, without the University lifting a finger.
I imagine the next DZ convention will be far more interesting than most.

But what obligation legally is the university under to extend an invitation to a sorority to be recognized and then keep that no matter what? I just fail to see how DePauw or anyway school is obligated to recognize an organization, especially when they have brought continuous bad publicity and have been stubborn and obnoxious towards their host.

It isn't about membership selection. The only thing DePauw has done that is remotely related to membership selection is to make a rule that organizations can't dump those that they promised to treat as family out on their butts in the middle of a school year, unless there is a dangerous/legal issue involved (I would assume this means drugs, bodily harm, etc.). I fail to see how this is unfair. Maybe forcing organizations to plan far in advance when dealing with a situation such as the Delta chapter had will promote a more gentle and sisterly/brotherly attitude and force those in charge to have time to think about what they are doing.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl

But what obligation legally is the university under to extend an invitation to a sorority to be recognized and then keep that no matter what? I just fail to see how DePauw or anyway school is obligated to recognize an organization, especially when they have brought continuous bad publicity and have been stubborn and obnoxious towards their host.

It isn't about membership selection. The only thing DePauw has done that is remotely related to membership selection is to make a rule that organizations can't dump those that they promised to treat as family out on their butts in the middle of a school year, unless there is a dangerous/legal issue involved (I would assume this means drugs, bodily harm, etc.). I fail to see how this is unfair. Maybe forcing organizations to plan far in advance when dealing with a situation such as the Delta chapter had will promote a more gentle and sisterly/brotherly attitude and force those in charge to have time to think about what they are doing.

Having recognized Delta Zeta, (a voluntary action on the part of DePauw) the school is bound by its own rules to treat it exactly as it said it would - through the University's self-written policies. That's why the policies are there in the first place - to ensure that all students and organization are treated equitably. Would any GLO want to go on at a college or university where they were subject to the whims of administrators? If so, those institutions which are anti-Greek (Cornell springs to mind) could just kick off the whole system without regard to the rights of the students and organizations. The students and organizations have obligations they must meet, as does the host institution. Again, I have yet to be presented with anything that shows that Delta Zeta received due process.
Am I the only one who sees the irony in DePauw kicking off DZ without due process because they "kicked out" (I know, I know) members without due process?
The policy - instituted AFTER the DZ debacle - that GLOs can't throw anyone out of the house mid-year is a good one. But it was not in place at the time Delta Zeta did so, and so Depauw can hardly say DZ did not meet their obligations. They can be upset, they can change the policy, but to throw out the chapter without going through the procedure THEY outline for transgressions by student organizations is to basically declare that the University is a dictatorship, not an institution built on a rule of law.
And whether or not a member is an active or an alumnae is indeed a membership issue. I married during college, and so became an alumna. Does the university have the right to say, no, she can remain active because we say so? I'd argue no - that is a membership issue for the GLO to decide.

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by 33girl

This might go way above that - as far as things like exactly how they decide to select their members. For example, a girl has a 4.0 so she gets 25 points on their 100 point scale or something. (This is a pulled from my nether regions example and I'm not saying any group does this) This is stepping into ritual territory.

I agree. Regardless of how individuals may feel about this, I'm sure GLO HQs (and the NPC, and the NIC, and the NPHC, and other groups) are quite concerned about the fall out as it may apply to *their* organizations.

[kddani]

Originally Posted by TSteven

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

And a federal judge would probably laugh at that. You could maybe get away with that with a trial level state court judge. But membership selection is the heart of this issue.

I don't want to see anyone's ritual get put into public record, but at the same time, DZ needs to realize that this could very likely come out.

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by kddani

And a federal judge would probably laugh at that. You could maybe get away with that with a trial level state court judge. But membership selection is the heart of this issue.

I don't want to see anyone's ritual get put into public record, but at the same time, DZ needs to realize that this could very likely come out.

If true, then I would not be surprised if the NPC, NIC, IFC, NPHC, Masons, Junior League and any organization that may involve ritual and or some sort of subjective or private (secrete) membership selection files some sort of "friend of the plaintiff" brief. (What ever the heck it might be called).