[23077] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] APO and constitutional rights
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Buddha Buck)
Thu Oct 31 16:08:00 2002
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:05:01 -0500
Reply-To: Buddha Buck <bmbuck@14850.COM>
From: Buddha Buck <bmbuck@14850.COM>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Vehlow, Richard wrote:
> Question: If it is a constitutional right to be able to peacefully
> assemble, then isn't it technically a violation of the Constitution for
> a school, especially a public college, to bar the organization of
> fraternities without due cause, such as a prior or existing incident of
> hazing in the fraternities in question?
Nope...
Governmental organizations can control the use of their facilities, use
of their funds, an their choice of affiliation without violating the
constitution. For instance, it is entirely legal for a post office to
close its doors at night, or to tell a group that they can't hold a
meeting in the lobby, etc. The post office grounds are government
property, not a public space.
If the post office provides meeting space, even for a fee, then the post
office is spending government money supporting the organizations that
utilize that meeting space. The laws concerning the spending of
government money may very well have limitations on the sort of
organizations the post office can support -- for instance, it may
prohibit the use of post office funds to promote non-abstinance-based
sex education for teenagers, which would prohibit a safe-sex workshop
aimed at teens to be given on post office property. In any event, the
post office is not obligated to provide space for organizations to
peacefully assemble.
A public school is in a similar position as the post office. They are
not obligated to provide recognition, support, or funding to
organizations -- and in some cases, are prohibited from doing so. It is
generally the policy at many public schools that first amendment
issues prevent the funding of political or religious-based student
groups, for instance. So a public school is under no obligation to
provide support for, recognition of, or services to fraternal
organizations if it chose not to.
Private schools have even fewer restrictions. The only restrictions
they face (besides general laws) come from the strings attached to the
funding they may receive from the Government. Title IX is a perfect
example here -- Title IX sets various conditions of gender equity on the
ability to receive federal funds for education. A school that wants
those funds (which includes Federal Student Aid packages) must adhere to
those conditions. But other than that, private schools are private
organisations, and can affiliate with anyone they so choose, under
whatever conditions they desire. They certainly aren't required to
affiliate with fraternities.
If, however, an organization decided to call itself a fraternity and
open its new membership only to students, but did not advertise on
campus, or meet on campus, or solicit the school for funds, or claim
affiliation, or request any services from the campus, then I don't think
a public school could ban students from joining and supporting the
organization. Private schools, however, probably could.
For the record, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.
Buddha Buck
>
> -Rich Vehlow
