USC Lawsuit

[GreekOne]

Lawsuit filed at USC over restrictions on deferred recruitment. This will be interesting to watch.

http://www.uscannenbergmedia.com/201...rush-to-court/

[carnation]

Good for those GLOs! The university should not be allowed to only apply their new policy to Greeks!

[Sen's Revenge]

I side with the school on this.

It's interesting which posts inspire "We're guests on campus" responses and which posts don't.

[33girl]

I also agree with the university.

The huge and obvious difference between a GLO and interhall council, or the Students for a Green Campus, or the science club, or literally any other college organization is that once you join a NPC or IFC GLO, you cannot join another one. The “membership is for life” trope rings a bit hollow when GLOs would rather rush to pledge people who might be unsuitable for that college, or college life in general, than giving them a semester to get used to their new world.

[AnchorAlumna]

People who are used to deferred rush/recruitment will tend to side with the university. People who are used to having rush/recruitment at the beginning won't.
I used to think that was a good idea. What it does is just stretch out the rush/recruitment period to the whole semester.
Personally, I feel it's better to get it all over with at the first of the year.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by 33girl

I also agree with the university.

The huge and obvious difference between a GLO and interhall council, or the Students for a Green Campus, or the science club, or literally any other college organization is that once you join a NPC or IFC GLO, you cannot join another one. The “membership is for life” trope rings a bit hollow when GLOs would rather rush to pledge people who might be unsuitable for that college, or college life in general, than giving them a semester to get used to their new world.

Our organizations should be able to adjust their expectations of numeric return, in both the financial and membership senses, with the newly-deferred recruitment schedule being required for some campuses. The number of students joining, and the number of new chapters being opened, are already becoming fewer.

Our orgs often hold formal recruitment before school transpires. The rejection felt by some who do not succeed in joining is evident in stories shared here on greekchat.

I try to remember that the current teenage generation can and do suffer helicopter parents and multi-activity burnout. They often do not learn to drive. Their young hearts and minds are attached to the glowing phone in their hands.

While our type of greek organizations do support and educate their membership, I agree with 33girl that a suitable time frame be allowed before the fraternal recruitment of new college students.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

People who are used to deferred rush/recruitment will tend to side with the university. People who are used to having rush/recruitment at the beginning won't.
I used to think that was a good idea. What it does is just stretch out the rush/recruitment period to the whole semester.
Personally, I feel it's better to get it all over with at the first of the year.

Don’t we always say that rush is 24/7/365? That all our chapters’ and members’ actions are a part of it, all the time, not just a week of rush?

As long as deferred recruitment isn’t being used incorrectly (for example, semester-long silence rules that defeat the entire purpose) I think it probably leads to fewer mistakes on both sides, when real people get a chance to get to know real people, instead of just glowing recs and sparkly recruitment videos.

[carnation]

Well, we've all been through this over and over for the last 18+ years but what I've seen with that is massive cheating--illegal recruitment parties, sleepovers, bid promising, and other things that defeated the good points totally.

I also feel like our personal viewpoints of deferred vs. non-deferred recruitment should not matter when the real issue is freedom of association. This is only affecting Greeks. Would more people yell if it affected all student organizations? Or if no one was allowed to pledge or join any student organization until senior year?

[ASTalumna06]

I come from a school that only used COB (at the time) and had deferred recruitment. I don't think I would have ever joined a sorority if I went to a large school with formal recruitment being held shortly after school started (or just before), as I knew nothing about Greek life going into college and didn't even consider it until my sophomore year. That's me. Others were prepped almost from birth and had applications and recs in order 9 months in advance of college and loved the experience of a huge formal recruitment and understood the time commitment from the start. That's not really the issue here.

Regardless of whether or not we're organizations that people join for a lifetime, and regardless of how much it might make sense academically to have students wait a semester before joining, the fact of the matter is that the school is restricting membership for first-semester freshmen only for Greek organizations. Why are they being singled out?

And don't try and argue that the school is thinking, "Young people make a lifetime commitment to these organizations. We have to be sure they're ready for that." That's not their motivation, so let's not pretend like it is.

[AZTheta]

Pretty certain this is a First Amendment issue. Although technically no, legally yes - that's my thinking.

Where's Kevin?

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by AZTheta

Pretty certain this is a First Amendment issue. Although technically no, legally yes - that's my thinking.

Where's Kevin?

Exactly what I was thinking: a potential First Amendment issue. But based on this situation in particular, I don't know that they have a steady legal leg to stand on.

Regardless, how we all feel about lifetime membership, grades, etc. is irrelevant. The question is whether or not the school is permitted to do this.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by AZTheta

Pretty certain this is a First Amendment issue. Although technically no, legally yes - that's my thinking.

Where's Kevin?

USC is a private university. I don't think this is a First Amendment issue because the Bill of Rights is a proscription on government activity. I don't think that's necessarily the end of the analysis and I'd love to read the complaint. The media organization obviously has a copy which they took a picture of... sideways... but didn't post a pdf to their site.

I can only guess that the complaint might state that USC hods themselves out as a bastion of free speech and there might even be aspects of the Student Code of Conduct which are relevant to a student's First Amendment rights. That might be more of a breach of contract situation... or at least there are a lot of right wing legal groups which have been talking about filing suit against a school on those grounds. I'm unaware as to whether anyone's prevailed on that sort of complaint. The case was filed in state court, so I can infer non-federal questions may be part of the content of the complaint, but there's no way of knowing because of the incomplete reporting.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

And don't try and argue that the school is thinking, "Young people make a lifetime commitment to these organizations. We have to be sure they're ready for that." That's not their motivation, so let's not pretend like it is.

And by the same token, let’s not pretend that when Greek orgs squawk about first amendment rights or “it helps freshmen grades” or “we can give freshmen a support system” that the main thing they’re sad about is not providing those services. It’s all about the Benjamins baby. They have a house to fill and believe freshmen are better because they will pay 4 years’ dues instead of 3 years (note: this only works if they actually stay active all 4 years).

And re carnation’s comment- if I make friends with someone and sleep over at their house, how on earth is that “cheating”? It’s part of building a friendship. We can pretend all we want that pre-freshman rush keeps things “fair” but we all know that isn’t the case. We might all be better off and have a lot less disappointed rushees (male and female) if we stopped kidding ourselves.

[AZTheta]

Thanks, Kevin, for your speedy and reasoned response. I should have known better. I'm always telling others about what the Bill of Rights does and doesn't cover, and this is a big DUH on me. Shows that we all make mistakes.

Thanks also for pointing out the omissions in the news coverage. It would certainly be useful and helpful to read the complaint.

USC has deep pockets. They wouldn't take this action without believing they would prevail. That's my opinion here.

Going to be interesting to watch this play out, indeed.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by 33girl

And by the same token, let’s not pretend that when Greek orgs squawk about first amendment rights or “it helps freshmen grades” or “we can give freshmen a support system” that the main thing they’re sad about is not providing those services. It’s all about the Benjamins baby. They have a house to fill and believe freshmen are better because they will pay 4 years’ dues instead of 3 years (note: this only works if they actually stay active all 4 years).

Also accurate, especially for those chapters that have a house to fill and pay for.