Meanwhile at UCLA, Sig Ep and Alpha Phi do Kanye & Kardashians

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Hartofsec

Hope the GLOs lawyer-up on this one.

It's easy money where UCLA is concerned. The school might as well just get ready to write an apology and a check.

Not to mention they possibly have a hell of a libel suit against this Afrikan group. Especially if that group continued to push this agenda of hysteria after they would reasonably have known there was no blackface here. Our organizations don't really have a history of being litigious, but here is where there needs to be a huge exception to the rule.

[Hartofsec]

Originally Posted by Kevin

It's easy money where UCLA is concerned. The school might as well just get ready to write an apology and a check.

Not to mention they possibly have a hell of a libel suit against this Afrikan group. Especially if that group continued to push this agenda of hysteria after they would reasonably have known there was no blackface here. Our organizations don't really have a history of being litigious, but here is where there needs to be a huge exception to the rule.

So the university could be required to pay damages if the GLO prevails? In addition to the GLO's legal costs?

Also, could individuals within the orgs seek damages regardless of what their GLO chooses to do (or not to do) legally?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Hartofsec

So the university could be required to pay damages if the GLO prevails? In addition to the GLO's legal costs?

What I see here are two potential causes of action--the first is a Civil Rights claim, a "1983" action, where a state official under the color of state law, deprived the organization or individuals of their civil liberties. There may be some tort claims act issues here, I really don't know anything about California law, but this is federal stuff and attorney fees are paid for the Plaintiffs if they prevail.

Also, could individuals within the orgs seek damages regardless of what their GLO chooses to do (or not to do) legally?

This would be more difficult, I think. I'm not sure this would fall into any of the libel per se categories, and again, I'm unfamiliar with California law, and this would be a state action, but it's certainly possible.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Hartofsec

So the university could be required to pay damages if the GLO prevails? In addition to the GLO's legal costs?

If these GLOs choose to sue and win, they've won the battle.

But, it is not enough to win a battle, you need to win the war.

Based on my understanding, all GLOs operate on a college campus as a guest on the campus. It is the university's choice to decide to recognize the GLO, and the university can have GLOs removed.

GLOs really need to think about the images they are putting out there. If universities feel that the GLO is a negative reflection on the school, then the GLO can be 'kicked' off campus.

One of the issues we're dealing with in my own org is media/social media image. Our undergrad chapters are being told to keep it clean and above reproach. The internet is forever.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Based on my understanding, all GLOs operate on a college campus as a guest on the campus. It is the university's choice to decide to recognize the GLO, and the university can have GLOs removed.

Your understanding of the First Amendment is poor.