Quote:
Originally Posted by Drolefille
The article doesn't say who placed them on suspension which is my question. Gotta hate the passive voice.
ETA: rereading it looks like it is a prohibition from holding events with other organizations. (And probably university imposed) Does that suspension differ significantly from the one imposed in the case you cited? Would including potential punishments for events that are considered inappropriate in the student organization charter make a difference? What about the PHC Judicial Board review?
|
The University can't sanction speech, period. It's that simple. Not the university itself or any of its surrogates, e.g., student courts, student government, etc.
What
could happen here is Gamma Phi Beta's HQ could sanction the chapter or possibly Panhellenic could do something.
Quote:
And while it may be true that the law favors the GLO, would it have to be HQ that fights it or the chapter? Either way, it is unclear that either chapter or HQ would be interested in fighting a "it's ok for us to wear warpaint" case.
I only object to calling the University's actions, if it was the university, illegal since it appears it is questionable, but would likely require a ruling to clarify.
|
The school's actions are not "questionably" illegal. They just are. Schools just cannot do this sort of thing, although they try to all the time. Schools probably do this because they don't think anyone will stand up to them.
I think you're right -- in this case, it looks like the group has decided to take the path of least resistance. If it were my group, I'd be strongly urging them to fight. University policies still have to follow the Constitution.
The Constitution says that the government cannot enjoin your speech except for in a handful of situations. Wearing indian costumes to a party doesn't happen to be an exception. It doesn't present a "clear and present danger" to anyone, it doesn't urge anyone to illegal action, it's not obscene, not child pornography, etc.
If the University had the power to do this, it would follow that the states would be able to outlaw groups such as the Black Panthers, Aryan Nation, etc. for their speech -- and I'm sure you know for a fact that they can't.