Yale suspends Bushes' fraternity for sexist chants

[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...

[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.

[exlurker]

From the Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/education/18yale.html

Similar article from the Yalie Daily:

http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/20...omm-sanctions/

The student paper’s article ^ includes the full text of Dean Miller’s e-mail to students, faculty, etc.

Miller cites (in general terms) Yale's own "regulations" against harassment, etc. See her email.

Excerpt:

. . . After a full hearing, the Committee found that the DKE chapter, as an organization, one comprised of Yale students, had threatened and intimidated others, in violation of the Undergraduate Regulations of Yale College as they pertain to “harassment, coercion or intimidation” and “imperiling the integrity and values of the University community.” The Executive Committee further found several fraternity members had also, as individuals, violated the same regulations. . . .

[Drolefille]

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.

While I agree, I can't think of an example where it has been tested, nor as pretty much every single school accepts federal funding in some way do I think anyone would have the standing to argue it.

I think the ban on interracial dating at one of the conservative Christian colleges was the closest thing I've seen to it, and it seemed to go away as soon as it was challenged in modern times iirc.