OU SAE to sue university, possibly President Boren

KFOR Channel 4 ^ | 3/12/2015 | M.DeLaTorre

[rickyrikardo]

NORMAN, Okla. — The local chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon is planning to pursue legal action against the University of Oklahoma, and possibly OU President David Boren.

The group has hired high-profile attorney, Stephen Jones to represent them.

Jones told NewsChannel 4 the group is outraged over President Boren shutting down the fraternity house and branding all SAE members as racists and bigots.

Jones says the two students who were expelled because of the incident have apologized sincerely for their remarks, and now the incident is being exploited.

[kjam22]

Yeah... I don’t know. But, it is a small number that has been expelled. The frat was closed and most of those students as I understand it are free to find housing somewhere else and continue to attend OU.

[DoodleDawg]

However, what jurisdiction does the university have to expel them and to take their property without due rocess that already exists within the university framework?

In the first place it's not their property. The frat house is university property and it was leased to the fraternity. As for expelling, the university student code is sufficiently vague enough to give the administration the cover it needs. For example, the handbook states "...the UVPSA or other appropriate administrative official vested with such authority, may immediately take Direct Administrative Action, which he/she deems necessary for the welfare or safety of the University Community...". That action can include expulsion, and the university's lawyers can make the case that Boren was acting for the welfare of the student community.

And to take the property of the other innocent frat brothers, i.e, their paid for living arrangements, without a hearing.

I'm sure they can get their money back from SAE. But once the fraternity disbanded then the students had no further right to live in the building.

And quite frankly, there are racists everywhere, of all colors.

And sizes and shapes. And they don't often get what they deserve. Nice to see an occasion when they do.

[grania]

Why are you calling them "punks"? There doesn't seem to be any indication it was anything but a dumb song. When I was a young child, we sang "100 bottles of beer on the wall" on bus rides for field trips. We sang "take one down and pass it all around". We weren't kicked out of school because we were supporting minors drinking illegally.

And how is Boren's extreme action helping? Don't you get it yet, after Ferguson-inspired riots? The only thing that's going to calm things down is NOT giving in to "demands for justice". Giving in is just opening the door for more and more ever-escalating protests and demands.

[DoodleDawg]

How many total members of the fraternity were there? And how many were chanting racial slurs on a bus off campus?

I have no idea. But they're all former members now.

I wonder what the punishment would have been if the roles were reversed and the racial chanters were black.

If that happens then it'll be intersting to see if there is a double standard. I suspect that in many corners there will be. But that doesn't make it right. Or excuse the SAW behavior.

[DoodleDawg]

Boren was completely within his university president's role in taking the action he did.

Based on the OU Student Handbook it sure looks like he has enough cover for taking the actions he took.

[TontoKowalski]

I agree with most of your analysis.

Closing the chapter was not a University action. That decision was made by the SAE national organization. That group was completely justified in doing so.

The expulsion of individual students is another matter. I think those students have a case.

I do not know the specifics of the case with fraternity houses at OU, but at most colleges, the University "owns" fraternity and sorority houses, provided they are on campus... in a sense, Greek Houses are dorms.

The evictions from the house... I'm not sure about how that would be viewed legally. In my experience, the students would have already paid for the housing as part of their tuition bills (on campus housing) and it seems somewhat unfair that a student who may not have even been present during the incident would have his housing stripped from him mid-semester with 24 hour notice.

I'm beginning to think that the University made a calculated decision to take actions they knew would not stand up in Court to protect/inoculate itself for other reasons... like protecting the reputation of the school in recruiting.

I think they probably know they are open to lawsuits, and will simply settle them as they arise.

[Enlightened1]

All O.U. has to do is contact SAE (Sigma Alpha Epsilon) Nationals to put this to rest. Nationals can permanently suspend a chapter at a university, and there is NOTHING the chapter can do about it.

For the record free speech means the Government can’t put you in jail for political speech they do not like.

Although every school, work place and organization have a code of conduct.

If you say things that could financially jeopardize or physically threaten a school, a business, an organization... then the school, work place and organization have the right to get rid of you.

SAE does not have a prayer and the lawsuit will only make things worse.

[DoodleDawg]

The evictions from the house... I'm not sure about how that would be viewed legally. In my experience, the students would have already paid for the housing as part of their tuition bills (on campus housing) and it seems somewhat unfair that a student who may not have even been present during the incident would have his housing stripped from him mid-semester with 24 hour notice.

One of the early stories on this mentioned that the evicted members could go to the Dean of Students for assistance if they needed help with lodging so I don't think they're going to be on the streets. But on the other hand I can't hold out a lot of sympathy for them because I find it impossible to believe that they would be unaware of the kind of things that went on.

I'm beginning to think that the University made a calculated decision to take actions they knew would not stand up in Court to protect/inoculate itself for other reasons... like protecting the reputation of the school in recruiting.

I agree for the most part with your reasons for their actions but I disagree that the University knew it was taking actions that couldn't stand up in court. I think they can, and will, be able to justify their actions under the student code of conduct listed in the OU Student Handbook.

[TontoKowalski]

For the record free speech means the Government can’t put you in jail for political speech they do not like.

There is way more to "Free Speech" than whether the government imprisons you.

Under your definition, the case against the IRS for unfair actions against conservative organizations is groundless, since Lois Lerner didn't actually throw the leaders in jail.

I fear I might be get tagged for defending the actions or the fraternity students, and I'm not. But I also believe that if the government gets to punish people for saying things that are unpopular in the mainstream, we might as well call it a day as far as the Constitution goes.

[Enlightened1]

The IRS case is completely different. They are not even remotely close.

What I said is well known in the business world for a long time now. For example, people cannot slander a business and then use the defense of free speech to avoid liability law suit.

If you jeopardize a business intentionally or not, the business reserves the right to get rid of you..... That has been the case since the founding of our country. Yes it has been challenged, but lost in court ever time.

I think the most famous case, that we hear often was a 1948 U.S. Supreme Court case where 1 Justice said paraphrasing, “the right to free speech does not mean it’s okay to yell fire in a crowed theater”.

Anyhow, when you cost a business money, then they are going to let go of you. The business only exists to make money and nothing further. Because it will not exist if it’s losing money.

Yes O.U. is a business. It cost money to run it. So yes it’s a business.

[tanknetter]

Sorry, but something that uses the word “n***er” as an epithet and glorifies lynching is anything but a “dumb song”

It’s hateful, demeaning and racist.

It’s also, within the context of a public university, protected free speech. But just because it’s protected free speech doen’t mean that it shouldn’t be called out for exactly what it is.

[Nea Wood]

That’s one fine post. Well said.

[ek_hornbeck]

Some white frat boys are guilty of tasteless racial slurs.

Meanwhile, blacks in places like Ferguson are busy rioting, looting, and in some cases murdering.

Which is the greater crime? The tasteless racial slur, of course!

[grania]

So, you're advocating that all music, poetry, and movies, and gatherings of blacks where that word is used should be banned?

Sorry, can't buy that. Freedom of speech is just that. Most words and phrases by their overuse lose their original offensive meanings. Whatever happened to "sticks and stones my break my bones, but names will never hurt me?"

Your desire to control speech cannot lead anywhere good.

[ek_hornbeck]

It’s hateful, demeaning and racist.

Maybe so, but a society that's more offended by white frat boys making a racist chant than it is by black violent crime has warped moral priorities.

[bert]

you have fallen head long in to the sewer that is political correctness

[Loud Mime]

I believe you are correct on the sports angle. Imagine the coaches as they heard this while on recruiting trips.

[tanknetter]

Nope, not what I’m saying at all.

I’m talking about the use of “n***er” as a direct racial epithet.

I’m not talking about making kids say the word as an exercise in literature, dialogue, or historical context.

For example, back during the OJ Simpson trial I got into an argument with a friend over Mark Furhman’s denial of use of the word. If you may recall, Furhman said that he only used the word in the context of helping develop dialogue for a book.

My friend said that was racist. I asked him whether he’d ever said the word. “No, of course not!”

To which I replied “You never had a teacher make you read passages from Huck Finn aloud?”

Crickets could be heard chirping.

There’s actually a movement afoot, there was a thread on it months ago, by Progressives to edit Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn to change “N***er Jim” to “Slave Jim”, which is insane. It completely screws up both the historical context of the use AND upends how Twain used the word to show the dehumanization of the humanizing character in the book.

So, again, context is everything. In this case the context was a bunch of punks using the term as an epithet in a demeaning, hateful and racist manner. Which again is protected speech, but not something that should be tolerated or accepted.

[tanknetter]

No disagreement with you there.

Two cops got shot in Ferguson, simply for being cops and for doing their jobs.

That should have knocked this whole OU mess out of the headlines. It’s telling that it didn’t.

[ek_hornbeck]

you have fallen head long in to the sewer that is political correctness

I pointed out how absurd it is to live in a society that's more offended by tasteless racial slurs uttered by whites than it is by black criminality. How is this "falling headlong into the sewer that is political correctness"? Seems to me everything I wrote was an attack on political correctness.