OT: Two OU Students in SAE Fraternity Expelled

The SAE chant was disgusting in every way but not sure you should expel someone for being racist.

I think it sets a dangerous precedent. Also, Is it even legal?

All the boys in that video should be expelled, they have to realize that they are not going to Oklahoma in the early 1900's

so if some one videos anybody singing a rap video with the n word in it and talking about bitches, will they be suspended?!

Since there seem to be many comments in here about whether or not the expulsion would be a violation of their free speech rights, here's a friendly reminder about the first amendment. It protects you from government prosecution. That's it. While you can argue that a public university may be a government organization and their discipline would violate the 1st amendment, open racism is most likely a violation of the school's honor code, allowing for the expulsion. Or in this case, OU's president thinks they're assholes and is showing them the door. I applaud President Boren for his swift action on this.

What i really want is the names of those chanting/involved.  All the free speech activists crying foul over their expulsion should have zero problem with this... all part of the free marketplace of ideas.  Seems that it has been confirmed that the racist who was standing up and singing enthusiastically is named Parker J. Rice. 

StephenRKass-

You had mentioned in the original post that you were wondering as to the outcome of the SAM incident at Treetops. Here is the latest that the situation stands at right now (much of this was covered on the board previously a few weeks ago when the penalty was announced):

The university has given the fraternity the death penalty, effectively, by barring it from campus for 4 years minimum, and they'd have to apply to be reinstated in the future. The current brothers can appeal this decision, but it does not seem likely they will do so. It is perceived that UM gave them the death penalty because UM SAM has circled the wagons and is refusing to name names, probably out of fear those brothers would face criminal or civil prosecution. In the decision given by the UM dean that issued the punishment, she repeatedly pointed out that no individuals responsible for the damages have been named to either the MI state police or to UM by SAM. So, by circling the wagons, they effectively have killed the fraternity, preferring to all go down with the ship. SAM national has not pulled UM SAM's charter, meaning they can live in the house for the remainder of the school year. The corporation that owns the SAM house (it's owned by alumni and rented to the current bros) will not be renting it next year to the current brothers at the present time.

I am personally very disappointed in the current incarnation of SAM, especially in the "leadership" they have currently in their house. If they were truly leaders, this wouldn't have happened in the first place.

It seems everyone agrees upon this. There should be punishment also seems to be agreed upon. 

1)  There is a case to be made that expelling the OU fratboys for being mini-Sterlings is an affront to free speech.  I'm not a lawyer and as such won't comment on the legal ramifications.  But, if we're speaking to the point of what ultimately advances the greater good, then you should absolutely expel the guilty SAEs for what they did.  If you do not, what kind of message does it send to a minority kid from Tulsa or Enid who's thinking of applying to OU?  How do you look her mom and dad in the face and tell them that OU is where she should stake her claim to the future?

2)  If push comes to shove, I'm not going to die on this particular hill because I think it more important to improve lives than ruin them, but as of this writing the names of the guilty parties have not been released.  Assuming that this holds up, that is some grade-A bullshit right there.  Trayvon Martin, who was poor and black, had his name dragged through the mud by various "news" outlets and was called a thug who got his pot-smoking ass suspended from school.  The OU frat boys who have a whole lot more money and a whole lot less melanin will be comparatively insulated by their privilege and will eventually be able to leverage family and frat connections to land anonymously cushy six-figure jobs in middle management.

3) I have a few friends who were Greeks so I certainly bristle at broad-brush condemnation of the Greek system.  That said, there is something flawed with the culture - and before we start making jokes about the south, let's remember that Michigan's had its own problems in that regard.  I'm particulary incensed in this case because the frat in question was an Asian frat and I'm Asian-American myself.

Gotta laugh, gently, at all the legal theorists "educating" people on how the first amendment works in this thread. A state university is unquestionably a state actor. It is part of the government and hence the first amendment applies to it. If only someone made a comic explaining this.

It's likely that if the university hadn't acted, the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division could have stepped in, said Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance," according to the Justice Department. In this case, Arnwine said, the university likely found that fraternity members appear not only to have discriminated in their membership -- and backed that discrimination with the threat of lynching -- but they've also created a hostile environment. The university, she said, "would've been compelled to do something to sanction and prevent this fraternity from engaging in racial discrimination." Arnwine said she wasn't personally familiar with the school's code of conduct, but she'd be surprised if the fraternity members' actions weren't in violation of university rules as well. All of these reasons are grounds to sanction the fraternity and expel specific members who were involved in the singing, she said. "A very important part of the lexicon of civil rights law is that you cannot create a hostile environment where you make it so people of different races or religions or women feel they can't function at your institution without being subjected to unlawful discrimination," she said.

Great read by Clay Travis (YTCT) re: OU Administration's hypocrisy: http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/oklahoma-stands-tall-against-racism-weak-against-violence-031015

I'm pretty sure this thread will get locked soon, but I have some thoughts:

First, the First Amendment only protects us from the government making laws to harm our freedom of expression, religion, assembly, etc.  It does not say that any organization we are a part of.can or cannot have rules about conduct.  I can walk down the street wearing a shirt that says "White People Suck," and while yes, some people will get pissed, the government cannot do anything about it.

Second, none of us can exercise freedom of speech which violates interpretation of the amendment by the Supreme Court, which includes "fighting words," slander, libel and inciting violence.

So, the organization involved here, OU, has rules about conduct and protecting its academic and social environment.  The losers involved clearly were reciting violent, hateful chants during a fraternity-sponsored event.  The fraternity is sponsored by the school (in fact, it appears their house is owned by the school, hence why OU maintenance guys were taking down their letters yesterday), and so they didn't follow the rules of the organization.  See ya, assholes.  Case closed.