Student Affairs Jumps the Gun, Announces Suspension of Pi Beta Phi Based on Questionable Report

It sounds like yet another abuse from a Greek organization on a college campus. From the Marquette Wire:

The Marquette chapter of Pi Beta Phi could be facing a suspension.

The Division of Student Affairs called a hearing to review the apparent infractions made by the sorority and determine if punishment is necessary.

University spokesman Brian Dorrington released a statement regarding the current proceedings.

“The sorority went through a formal hearing, but no final decision has been made,” Dorrington said in an email. “Leaders within our Division of Student Affairs team meet regularly with our Greek communities and we emphasize that we expect all of our students to uphold Marquette’s Catholic and Jesuit values.”

The university has yet to reveal what these infractions are.

Pi Beta Phi declined to comment.

In reality, what happened was this: a prospective pledge of the sorority complained to Student Affairs that a member of the sorority had forced her to drink an entire bottle of tequila. Without seeking corroboration, Student Affairs proceeded to suspend Pi Beta Phi.

The sorority appealed. It turns out that the claim of forced drinking was questionable. The prospective pledge who made the claim has a history of alcohol abuse, including multiple trips to the emergency room for excessive drinking. Witnesses contradict her account of being forced to drink a bottle of tequila. The suspension was revoked, but the sorority did have to pay a fine of $500 for allowing underage drinking.

Thus the chapter was not blameless, but they were not guilty of the very serious claimed infraction that led to their suspension.

Corey Lansing, the Student Affairs staffer who handled the case, responded to our query saying he was referring it to Marquette’s Office of Marketing and Communication. Neither the national office of Phi Beta Phi, nor the president of the local chapter (Sara Matloub), responded to a request for comment.

This case looks like a blunder on the part of Student Affairs, which acted precipitously and besmirched the reputation of a campus organization unjustly.

Alcohol abuse on colleges is a serious problem, but this may be a case (like sexual assault) were a moral panic over the issue has trumped notions of fairness and due process. Rather than an abuse from a Greek organization, it appears to be an abuse of a Greek organization.

[Note: updated 7:17 p.m. to reflect the fact that the suspension has been lifted, and that the fine was for underage drinking.] 

Marquette’s Suspension of Marquette Warrior Violated Marquette’s Own Rules

We just yesterday reported that we have been “suspended” from our duties at Marquette, due to a blog post of ours that criticized a Philosophy instructor who informed a student that gay marriage could not be discussed in her class because any opposition to the policy would be “homophobic” and would likely “offend” any gay students in the class.

The “suspension” is a bit of a joke, since it’s Christmas break and we aren’t teaching. We are only working on a manuscript, and are allowed to go to campus to do that.

Leave aside issues of academic freedom, and the fact that Marquette, when faced with a brouhaha that was dying down,  chose to heat it up to white hot.  There is the fact that in suspending us Marquette violated its own rules, which can be found here.

Section 307.03

In all cases of nonrenewal, suspension, or termination for absolute or discretionary cause, except Section 307.02(1) and (3), death, and permanent, total disability, the appropriate appointing authority of the University shall notify the faculty member in writing of the University's action. The notice shall include:

(1) The statute allegedly violated; the date of the alleged violation; the location of the alleged violation; a sufficiently detailed description of the facts constituting the violation including the names of the witnesses against the faculty member.

(2) The nature of the University’s contemplated action, with a specification of the date or dates upon which such action is to become effective with respect to faculty status, duties, salary, and benefit entitlements, respectively.

(3) Such notice shall be personally delivered and service shall operate from date of such delivery; if in the exercise of reasonable diligence it is not possible to personally serve the faculty member, it may be served by certified mail addressed to the faculty member’s last known place of residence, and service shall operate from date of mailing.

In fact, all of Section 1 was violated by the letter of suspension we got, which did not specify the statute allegedly violated, the date of the alleged violation, the location of the alleged violation, and any of the supposed facts of the violation.

Since this was about a blog post, there were plenty of witnesses, but none of them were named.

We were also told that the “university is continuing to review your conduct” but were not told the nature of any “contemplated action.”

Did university officials rattle off the letter without consulting counsel?

Did they think they could blow off their published rules? In any legal action, Marquette’s failure to follow its own rules will have negative consequences.

We have first rate legal counsel: Rick Esenberg and his colleagues at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.

Marquette’s inept handling of this whole issue has been obvious. They appear to be on track to get into yet more trouble.