University fo Okahoma-Sigma Alpha Epsilon-Racial Chant

[SAEalumnus]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The President of SAE (at least by law, I have no idea about any of SAE's internal machinations) shouldn't see any legal issues here. SAE is a private organization. The government doesn't guarantee you due process rights with regard to private entities.

Not so, I'm afraid. Due process is guaranteed by SAE's national Fraternity Laws (available publicly here). Pursuant to Section 46C6 of the Fraternity Laws, the national president, with the consent of the Supreme Council, may suspend a charter and refer the matter with his report to the next Fraternity Convention for a final determination to be made there. Nowhere in the Fraternity Laws is the national president or the Supreme Council granted the authority to revoke a charter, such authority being reserved exclusively to the Fraternity Convention. That chant goes against everything SAE stands for, so those who participated in or otherwise supported it absolutely should be held to answer for it, but the revocation of that chapter's charter was technically illegal. Having personally attended SAE's national leadership school, I can confirm that no such chant or any other is or has ever been part of the curriculum of that program. The only songs you'll find officially sanctioned by SAE, nevermind taught at the leadership school, are these.

The Supreme Council set a precedent for exercising authority properly reserved to the Convention just last year with the implementation of the True Gentleman Experience ("TGE" / elimination of the pledging program). At the center of both the OU issue and the previous issue with the implementation of the TGE last year is the following single sentence:

"The Supreme Council shall: Represent the Fraternity Convention in the interval between sessions. [Section 21A of the Fraternity Laws (2013)]"

The national president and Supreme Council are hanging their collective hat on the word 'represent' and whether that means that the Supreme Council in fact possesses the full power and authority of the Fraternity Convention while the latter is not in session vs. whether they are simply stewards of that authority in the interim.

One example is sufficient to illustrate this point, which is in the context of the TGE program implemented last year.

If you consider Section 21A in the context of the entire body of the Fraternity Laws, in particular considering Sections 6, 9A, 12C, 12E, 12G, 73A, and 73B, it becomes abundantly clear that any decision to amend or repeal any portion of the Fraternity Laws or of the Ritual may only be accomplished by a supermajority vote of those entitled to a seat at the Convention, then only after prior written notice, and then only if the undergraduates possess a majority of the votes to be cast. Quite simply, the Supreme Council does not have the authority they asserted when the TGE was announced.

What happens if the 2015 Convention repeals this new program? When asked this very question, Deran Abernathy, Associate Executive Director for the Fraternity, explicitly confirmed that in the event the next Convention rejects and repeals this new program, the Supreme Council could “re-up” the program as soon as the Convention had adjourned. This is not rumor or hearsay, I spoke on the phone personally with Deran and had this very conversation.

Let's think about this for a moment. The Fraternity Convention is supposed to be the highest authority of government within our Fraternity, explicitly superior to that of the Supreme Council (Sections 6 and 9A), and is the very body to which an appeal from a decision of the Supreme Council may be taken (Section 78B). The Fraternity Convention is only in session for three days at a time once every two years; but during the other 99% of the time the Convention does not cease to exist. Its membership may still be consulted by direct mail ballot as provided for in Section 12E, which allows for a relatively brief maximum turn around time before a decision may be made. If we are to believe the current Supreme Council's interpretation of the word 'represent,' then that renders the entire biennial Convention both moot and meaningless, as the Supreme Council would have full power and authority to entirely disregard the orders of the Fraternity Convention and do whatever the hell they want during all but three days every two years. This would also mean that an appeal to the "Fraternity Convention" of a decision of the Supreme Council would effectively mean appealing to the Supreme Council regarding a decision of the Supreme Council and all the conflict of interest and bias that implies. The notion that the Supreme Council 'representing' the Fraternity Convention necessarily means they have the full power and authority of the Convention defies logic as well as due process.

In the present case at OU, certainly a swift and decisive response was warranted, but I and others are firmly convinced that the national president and Supreme Council were more motivated by the PR value of revoking OKKA's charter than they were with the legality of doing so or of the due process owed to their members, some of whom may actually be innocent in this, nevermind the Supreme Council's current efforts to pursue expulsion proceedings against every single member of that chapter. Guilty until proven otherwise, it would seem.

The following are SAE's national president's own words as posted earlier this week on Facebook, which I will let speak for themselves:

Originally Posted by Brad Cohen, March 29, 2015, 8:14pm, Facebook

I'm amazed that a University President such as Boren of OU does not know the difference between "learned" and "heard."

If he truly believes these bigots at our former chapter at his University "learned" or were taught that vile song as part of the curriculum at one of the greatest learning experiences for young college men, the Mosely Leadership School, vs heard it from perhaps a handful of equally bigoted idiots outside of the extensive leadership curriculum, then he should not hold the position that he does as President of a major University.

His statements were inflammatory and self serving. At the end of the day, it was his students that chose to hear a vile chant, take it back to their university and make it part of their culture in their chapter.

Disgusting, one sided and biased and I'm done being silent.

After spending the weekend with a retired Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a retired Army General, the Director for the U.S. patent office and a retired President of Marriott International [here he's referring to guest speakers at the Inner Circle program held this past weekend], most of whom attended the Mosely Leadership School as undergraduates and all learned valuable lessons from it as have tens of thousands of members over its 80 year history, I'm more convinced than ever that SAE builds character, it leads based on its strong values and principles of the True Gentlemen and has an amazing membership that has gone on to contribute enormously to society.

Like any organization, government, university or business, bad apples exist. How you deal with those bad apples is what counts.

We showed clearly and a lot faster than Oklahoma University did, we mean what we say, by closing the chapter within hours of seeing the disgusting video and bringing charges against all members for expulsion.

SAE is not the largest and one of the oldest Fraternities because it's a racist organization. It is because of its values and its ability to change and adapt over the past 159 years.

A racist organization doesn't elect a Jewish immigrant from South Africa as its national President. I'm proud to lead it, I'm proud of of our members and I'm proud of the many bold and proactive changes we've made in the past year. As our executive director has clearly stated, if any chapter uses this vile chant, they too will be dealt with harshly and swiftly.