Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Correct.Since the university no doubt has codes of conduct and a bunch of legalese that probably none of these drunk frat boys bothered to read before they signed, not so much.
Oh, look everyone, Mac is coming out in favor of racist frat boys.
And the stretch begins. What they did was speech. Its speech a lot of people (including some of their defenders) do not like. It was not done in front of people who might have been offended, it was not directed at any person in particular, and it was not endorsed by anyone in any position of power (which is usually needed to create a "hostile environment"
Even the ACLU agrees that the University probably went too far.
ACLU of Oklahoma Statement in Response to the University of Oklahoma s Announcement of VP of Diversity Position American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma
Bring it on! Obviously, any lawsuit is going to involve extensive discovery, which is likely to determine when the offensive songs were written, who wrote them, how long they have been a part of life at SAE, and lead to significant detrimental publicity for both the local chapter and its members and alumni, and also for the national fraternity.
Let the SAE make a public spectacle of themselves, demanding the right to chant about lynching "N's" in trees!
The UCLA also states that "the University of Oklahoma has an obligation to protect all of its students from a hostile learning environment that impedes their educational opportunities."
And that's exactly what OU is doing.
Basically you are frothing at the mouth at the prospect of a witch hunt.
And again, how is this creating a hostile learning environment?
The real hostility is now any student realizes they can be expelled for unpopular opinions. Going to go after opponents of Gay Marriage yet.
You are a Fascist, and a Coward.
That frat house was allowed to exist on college campus at the pleasure of OU. They can shut them down for any number of reasons. Another thing to keep in mind is that one of the frat brats blamed his behavior on drinking, and he's a minor. That alone is cause to shut down the house.
Once again stupid, NO ONE is protesting the frat being shut down.
As a caveat the National Fraternity is within their rights to revoke the charter. Not so sure the university can just unilaterally shut it down due to the actions of its members, if said actions are protected.
In cases that involve a free speech issue.That's the same simplistic, idiotic argument all liberals use: "The college has a code of conduct therefore the expulsion was constitutional." Then we see what legal experts say: "the code could not take precedence over First Amendment rights." Link http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/u...oma-students-leads-to-free-speech-debate.html
Do you liberals really think that this all boils down to the existence of a code of conduct? Is there any university that doesn't have one? Do you argue that legal experts somehow believe that OU didn't have a code of conduct?
the first Amendment doesn't prevent universities from taking action, just Congress. so, no.
Now, I'm sure that there's some ambulance chaser who is going to take this to court, and the university might even settle to get rid of the charge.
Public Universities have been held to the same standard of speech protection that government has.
This isn't about freedom of speech, you idiot. The students were expelled over conduct. When you sing songs about lynching "N's it creates a hostile environment, and those students were in violation of school policy, for which they signed a contract.
And the stretch begins. What they did was speech. Its speech a lot of people (including some of their defenders) do not like. It was not done in front of people who might have been offended, it was not directed at any person in particular, and it was not endorsed by anyone in any position of power (which is usually needed to create a "hostile environment"
Even the ACLU agrees that the University probably went too far.
ACLU of Oklahoma Statement in Response to the University of Oklahoma s Announcement of VP of Diversity Position American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma
Bring it on! Obviously, any lawsuit is going to involve extensive discovery, which is likely to determine when the offensive songs were written, who wrote them, how long they have been a part of life at SAE, and lead to significant detrimental publicity for both the local chapter and its members and alumni, and also for the national fraternity.
Let the SAE make a public spectacle of themselves, demanding the right to chant about lynching "N's" in trees!
The UCLA also states that "the University of Oklahoma has an obligation to protect all of its students from a hostile learning environment that impedes their educational opportunities."
And that's exactly what OU is doing.
Basically you are frothing at the mouth at the prospect of a witch hunt.
And again, how is this creating a hostile learning environment?
The real hostility is now any student realizes they can be expelled for unpopular opinions. Going to go after opponents of Gay Marriage yet.
You are a Fascist, and a Coward.
That frat house was allowed to exist on college campus at the pleasure of OU. They can shut them down for any number of reasons. Another thing to keep in mind is that one of the frat brats blamed his behavior on drinking, and he's a minor. That alone is cause to shut down the house.
Once again stupid, NO ONE is protesting the frat being shut down.
In cases that involve a free speech issue.That's the same simplistic, idiotic argument all liberals use: "The college has a code of conduct therefore the expulsion was constitutional." Then we see what legal experts say: "the code could not take precedence over First Amendment rights." Link http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/u...oma-students-leads-to-free-speech-debate.html
Do you liberals really think that this all boils down to the existence of a code of conduct? Is there any university that doesn't have one? Do you argue that legal experts somehow believe that OU didn't have a code of conduct?
the first Amendment doesn't prevent universities from taking action, just Congress. so, no.
Now, I'm sure that there's some ambulance chaser who is going to take this to court, and the university might even settle to get rid of the charge.
Public Universities have been held to the same standard of speech protection that government has.
The OU case doesn't.
Really..what conduct? They were expelled for their speech which is protected under the first amendment.Correct.Since the university no doubt has codes of conduct and a bunch of legalese that probably none of these drunk frat boys bothered to read before they signed, not so much.
Oh, look everyone, Mac is coming out in favor of racist frat boys.
They were expelled due to conduct, not speech.
In cases that involve a free speech issue.That's the same simplistic, idiotic argument all liberals use: "The college has a code of conduct therefore the expulsion was constitutional." Then we see what legal experts say: "the code could not take precedence over First Amendment rights." Link http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/u...oma-students-leads-to-free-speech-debate.html
Do you liberals really think that this all boils down to the existence of a code of conduct? Is there any university that doesn't have one? Do you argue that legal experts somehow believe that OU didn't have a code of conduct?
the first Amendment doesn't prevent universities from taking action, just Congress. so, no.
Now, I'm sure that there's some ambulance chaser who is going to take this to court, and the university might even settle to get rid of the charge.
Public Universities have been held to the same standard of speech protection that government has.
The OU case doesn't.
Correct.Since the university no doubt has codes of conduct and a bunch of legalese that probably none of these drunk frat boys bothered to read before they signed, not so much.
Oh, look everyone, Mac is coming out in favor of racist frat boys.
They were expelled due to conduct, not speech.
Correct.Since the university no doubt has codes of conduct and a bunch of legalese that probably none of these drunk frat boys bothered to read before they signed, not so much.
Oh, look everyone, Mac is coming out in favor of racist frat boys.
They were expelled due to conduct, not speech.
Good for them. Racism should not be trumped as long as we have a first amendment. Rappers say ****** all the time, so that validates it for general use. Besides, why destroy a kids life for making a dumb mistake?March 12, 2015: "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."
OU SAE to sue university possibly President Boren KFOR.com
Racists have rights too don't you think? How about we expell communist for saying "workers of the world unite"? Slippery slope. Shame is a better deterrent anyway.Since the university no doubt has codes of conduct and a bunch of legalese that probably none of these drunk frat boys bothered to read before they signed, not so much.
Oh, look everyone, Mac is coming out in favor of racist frat boys.
Doesnt have a snowballs chance in hell.March 12, 2015: "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."
OU SAE to sue university possibly President Boren KFOR.com
Yes we do. Watch and see who wins. Its a shame some attorney talked them into paying for their Lamborghini but I called this.And if they had been making anti-war comments? Can the university toss them out? How about if they were demonstrating for SSM or against it? Can they be tossed out for that? Are you saying a public university has the authority to tell its students what political positions it will or will not allow? What religious expressions it will or will not allow? How about if the university decided only Christian symbols are allowed and required each student to attend bible studies? If the First Amendment protections can be ignored by a public university, then they can be ignored.
What those kids did was stupid. I have no idea what their motivation was. But what you are suggesting is tossing out one of our most important protections against government intrusion just because you don't happen to like what they said.
You know what, some of us can make distinctions between political speech and just being an asshole.
and the university did just that.
You and the University don't get to make that call.
March 12, 2015: "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."
OU SAE to sue university possibly President Boren KFOR.com
Yes we do. Watch and see who wins. Its a shame some attorney talked them into paying for their Lamborghini but I called this.And if they had been making anti-war comments? Can the university toss them out? How about if they were demonstrating for SSM or against it? Can they be tossed out for that? Are you saying a public university has the authority to tell its students what political positions it will or will not allow? What religious expressions it will or will not allow? How about if the university decided only Christian symbols are allowed and required each student to attend bible studies? If the First Amendment protections can be ignored by a public university, then they can be ignored.
What those kids did was stupid. I have no idea what their motivation was. But what you are suggesting is tossing out one of our most important protections against government intrusion just because you don't happen to like what they said.
You know what, some of us can make distinctions between political speech and just being an asshole.
and the university did just that.
You and the University don't get to make that call.
March 12, 2015: "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."
OU SAE to sue university possibly President Boren KFOR.com
They have no standing since the parent fraternity withdrew their charter
They are no longer SAE....rightfully so
I suspect that the university president is not very concerned whether his decision withstands a court challenge or not. I think he is more afraid of being branded a racist, or at least being branded to tolerant of racism if he does not reacted strong enough to this situation. In today's society, being a racist is almost as bad of a sin as being a pedofile in the eyes of many people.
If the college president's decision is overturned, he can still claim to be hard on racism and blame the courts. This way he will not loose face in the acedemic community for being too soft on racism.
