GreekChat.com Forums

GreekChat.com Forums (http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/index.php)
-   Greek Life (http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Lawsuit: Sorority Membership a "Human Rights" Issue? (http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/showthread.php?t=132865)

LaneSig 03-06-2013 01:33 PM

Lawsuit: Sorority Membership a "Human Rights" Issue?
 
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/b...into-sorority/

Two aspirants of Alpha Kappa Alpha have sued the sorority. They are alledging that since they have not been initiated, their human rights are being violated.

"How is any of this a violation of human rights law? The aspiring sisters say they're being discriminated against because, as legacies, their mothers were also in the sorority. In other words, they're being treated differently because of their "familial status"—a protected class under the D.C. Human Rights Act. In addition to monetary damages, the would-be Alpha Kappa Alphas want the court to grant an injunction putting the pledging process on hold."

AOII Angel 03-06-2013 01:49 PM

Really!?

WCsweet<3 03-06-2013 01:55 PM

Quote:

When they applied again, they say they were told that they couldn't be accepted because of a cap on new sisters. Much of the lawsuit hinges on this, but the gist is that Cofield and Compton say that, as legacies, they should be among the first to be inducted, and the sorority says there's nothing they can do to get around the cap.
Thought that was an interesting part of the article.
So It's not that they won't be inducted ever, it's that there are other women being inducted first? Also love that there were hazing allegations, but those aren't a focus. :rolleyes:

Kevin 03-06-2013 02:05 PM

This just highlights how easy it is to file a lawsuit. You can file one literally for anything you want.

Whether your requested relief is granted is a whole 'nother ball game. Assuming the Defendants timely file an Answer, expect it to go nowhere.

NinjaPoodle 03-06-2013 02:22 PM

Yeah, of the other NPHC discussions I'm witnessing, these are comments that stick out:

1.I'm sick of these frivolous lawsuits. Even if they manage to sue their way in, what kind of experience will they have as members of the sorority? I'm sure these two are great young women who are deserving of the letters, even outside of the fact that they are legacies. However, I hope this lawsuit does not turn out favorably for them. Can you imagine what it would mean for the rest of us if some court decided that sorority membership is a right? Oh well, I'm sure this will be settled.

2. I thought I was reading the Onion for a second....that's crazy!

3. Human rights violation? they cannot be serious in equating sorority membership status with a human rights violation. overpriviledged and entitlement mentality .... no clue about real human rights issues...

4. Human rights violation? The very utterance insults Black culture as a whole. How does one go from human rights violations being, shot with hoses to attend a better school, to a Ms. HBCU not getting to dress tacky with the other girls.

5. Oh COME ON! Classic 90s baby "I win because I'm me" mentality.

What's funny: that a lawyer took this case.

AOII Angel 03-06-2013 03:50 PM

I wonder what their AKA family members think. I'd be sooo embarrassed.

ComradesTrue 03-06-2013 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2206793)
I wonder what their AKA family members think. I'd be sooo embarrassed.

Unless their AKA familiy members are anything like some of our NPC members and became furious that their special snowflakes weren't chosen.

knight_shadow 03-06-2013 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinjaPoodle (Post 2206772)
Yeah, of the other NPHC discussions I'm witnessing, these are comments that stick out:

1.I'm sick of these frivolous lawsuits. Even if they manage to sue their way in, what kind of experience will they have as members of the sorority? I'm sure these two are great young women who are deserving of the letters, even outside of the fact that they are legacies. However, I hope this lawsuit does not turn out favorably for them. Can you imagine what it would mean for the rest of us if some court decided that sorority membership is a right? Oh well, I'm sure this will be settled.

My thoughts exactly. Methinks a few exams and/or applications may get "lost in the mail"

Quote:

What's funny: that a lawyer took this case.
He was one of those TV Lawyers, IIRC. Along the lines of "The Texas Hammer" (for my Texas folks)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2206793)
I wonder what their AKA family members think. I'd be sooo embarrassed.

I thought I remembered reading somewhere that their mothers were assisting with this.

----------

Entitled asses.

Gamma Xi Phi 03-06-2013 05:56 PM

Both mothers are co-plaintiffs; at least one is an alumna of the chapter.

Additional article


Commentary from a retired GCer

MysticCat 03-06-2013 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 2206768)
This just highlights how easy it is to file a lawsuit. You can file one literally for anything you want.

Whether your requested relief is granted is a whole 'nother ball game. Assuming the Defendants timely file an Answer, expect it to go nowhere.

This.

NinjaPoodle 03-06-2013 07:21 PM

FWIW we're only hearing one side of the story.

IrishLake 03-06-2013 08:39 PM

Sen is SUCH a good lookin guy!

NinjaPoodle 03-06-2013 08:41 PM

Another comment from a chat group:
Quote:

at this point it's not about membership...it's about hurting the org. They don't care about being a AKA. They trying to hurt and embarrass the org and get some cash in doing so. Even if they aren't successful, lawsuits are expensive to fight and having one filed against you hurts your character.

NinjaPoodle 03-06-2013 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishLake (Post 2206847)
Sen is SUCH a good lookin guy!

Off topic^^ but I concur!!

Gamma Xi Phi 03-06-2013 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishLake (Post 2206847)
Sen is SUCH a good lookin guy!

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinjaPoodle (Post 2206849)
Off topic^^ but I concur!!

He says thanks and hopes that you follow him on facebook and twitter.

MysticCat 03-06-2013 09:25 PM

LOL

knight_shadow 03-06-2013 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishLake (Post 2206847)
Sen is SUCH a good lookin guy!

http://25.media.tumblr.com/436497aed...no4_r1_250.gif

sigmadiva 03-07-2013 12:10 AM

This lawsuit will not hurt AKA's reputation.

They've survived worse - lawsuit, no lawsuit.

The only hurt reputations out of this are the ladies and their moms. After a while it should have been obvious to the ladies that the chapter did not want them. They just should have dropped it and moved on with their lives.

Let's say they do win, and obtain membership in the org. I would imagine that they would be greatly shunned by the members. So what - you're in, you have the letters and pin, but no one will talk to you, no one wants you in their chapter. They would be AKAs in name only. I seriously doubt they would have the positive emotional connections and sisterhood they would like to have.

I suspect that the chapter did not want to deal with the lunacy of these ladies. The chapter had every right to reject them, but based on the article the chapter may have handled it wrong. The chapter should not have toyed with them and strung them along.

I'm with everyone else in thinking that this is a frivolous lawsuit. I really hope the ladies don't win.

oliwells880 03-07-2013 02:58 AM

I'm surprised! Usually, family members who was injured in hazing or died in hazing are the one that filed cases in the sorority of violating human rights.

MysticCat 03-07-2013 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oliwells880 (Post 2206876)
I'm surprised! Usually, family members who was injured in hazing or died in hazing are the one that filed cases in the sorority of violating human rights.

Lawsuits for violations of "human rights" as such are, in my experience at least, rare in American jurisprudence. I was actually surprised (well, maybe not really) to see that there is (maybe) a basis for such a claim in DC.

Lawsuits for violations of constitutional rights or civil rights are, of course, another matter.

But lawsuits by those injured in hazing or by the families of those who died as a result of hazing are typically going to be in tort, not for violation of "human rights."

Old_Row 03-07-2013 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaneSig (Post 2206751)
"How is any of this a violation of human rights law? The aspiring sisters say they're being discriminated against because, as legacies, their mothers were also in the sorority. In other words, they're being treated differently because of their "familial status"—a protected class under the D.C. Human Rights Act. In addition to monetary damages, the would-be Alpha Kappa Alphas want the court to grant an injunction putting the pledging process on hold."

Aside from the fact that I agree with everyone else that this whole thing is ridiculous, if for some reason the court was to rule in their favor and allow them to join because of their legacy status, wouldn't non-legacies then be able to sue based on their human rights being violated because of their "familial status" of not having an AKA in their family?

sigmadiva 03-07-2013 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oliwells880 (Post 2206876)
I'm surprised! Usually, family members who was injured in hazing or died in hazing are the one that filed cases in the sorority of violating human rights.

You need to know the mentality behind the lawsuit.

1. They are not suing because they were hazed. They are suing because they were hazed and did not get in. In their minds they did all that "work" and they did not gain membership. Had they gained membership after being hazed they would not have sued.

2. Why they think it is a human rights issue - They were probably raised to think, since birth, that they are to be AKAs. I'm sure their moms in some way made sure these ladies (as children) we part of the "right" social group growing up, and were seen and participated in the "right" functions and activities, all with respect to the AfAm community. This was part of their grooming and preparation to become AKA.

I suspect along the way these moms told their girls that they have the right to live where they want, be anything they want to be, the right to vote, and oh, yes, the "right" to become an AKA.

To compound this issue, they wanted to join AKA through the 100+ yr old Alpha chapter, and in addition to that, a chapter at a HBCU.

---------

This lawsuit is really about those ladies and their moms saving face.

Old_Row 03-07-2013 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva (Post 2206908)
You need to know the mentality behind the lawsuit.

1. They are not suing because they were hazed. They are suing because they were hazed and did not get in. In their minds they did all that "work" and they did not gain membership. Had they gained membership after being hazed they would not have sued.

2. Why they think it is a human rights issue - They were probably raised to think, since birth, that they are to be AKAs. I'm sure their moms in some way made sure these ladies (as children) we part of the "right" social group growing up, and were seen and participated in the "right" functions and activities, all with respect to the AfAm community. This was part of their grooming and preparation to become AKA.

I suspect along the way these moms told their girls that they have the right to live where they want, be anything they want to be, the right to vote, and oh, yes, the "right" to become an AKA.

To compound this issue, they wanted to join AKA through the 100+ yr old Alpha chapter, and in addition to that, a chapter at a HBCU.

---------

This lawsuit is really about those ladies and their moms saving face.

I was reading the comments on that article and they were saying Howard puts a maximum on the number of pledges a group can take and that many many times that number come out as interests. That is a lot like what NPC groups have to go through especially at schools where there are a lot of legacies. Isn't it unusual for NPHC chapters to have a maximum put on them like that? I obviously understand if that can't be answered since I don't want any secret information revealed. I never had heard of a school putting limits down like that.

sigmadiva 03-07-2013 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old_Row (Post 2206911)
I was reading the comments on that article and they were saying Howard puts a maximum on the number of pledges a group can take and that many many times that number come out as interests. That is a lot like what NPC groups have to go through especially at schools where there are a lot of legacies. Isn't it unusual for NPHC chapters to have a maximum put on them like that? I obviously understand if that can't be answered since I don't want any secret information revealed. I never had heard of a school putting limits down like that.

No, its not unusual for NPHC orgs to put a cap on their chapter membership. One other HBCU that I know has a cap of 50 incoming members. Putting a cap on membership just helps to control numbers. Much like the quota system of NPC.

Again, you have to understand the mentality behind this. In the AfAm community, the idea is that if you pledge a NPHC org at a HBCU, then you will get the "real" pledging experience. There is more significance to joining NPHC orgs at HBCUs than PWIs.

And, there is more significance in joining a NPHC org as an undergrad vs. grad (alumnae) member.

So, the ideal way of joining is as an undergrad at a HBCU. For this case in particular, joining the Alpha chapter was just the ultimate way of joining.

knight_shadow 03-07-2013 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva (Post 2206912)
No, its not unusual for NPHC orgs to put a cap on their chapter membership. One other HBCU that I know has a cap of 50 incoming members. Putting a cap on membership just helps to control numbers. Much like the quota system of NPC.

So this was Howard putting the cap on membership, not AKA? I didn't know that the schools had any pull with regard to intake (outside of "you can't bring in any new members").

Old_Row 03-07-2013 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva (Post 2206912)
No, its not unusual for NPHC orgs to put a cap on their chapter membership. One other HBCU that I know has a cap of 50 incoming members. Putting a cap on membership just helps to control numbers. Much like the quota system of NPC.

Again, you have to understand the mentality behind this. In the AfAm community, the idea is that if you pledge a NPHC org at a HBCU, then you will get the "real" pledging experience. There is more significance to joining NPHC orgs at HBCUs than PWIs.

And, there is more significance in joining a NPHC org as an undergrad vs. grad (alumnae) member.

So, the ideal way of joining is as an undergrad at a HBCU. For this case in particular, joining the Alpha chapter was just the ultimate way of joining.

OK I think I got it. Would a school like Howard with a long history and many alumnae be likely to have more legacies looking to join than spots available?

knight_shadow 03-07-2013 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old_Row (Post 2206914)
OK I think I got it. Would a school like Howard with a long history and many alumnae be likely to have more legacies looking to join than spots available?

Howard is like the Ole Miss/Bama of HBCUs (with regard to this topic).

sigmadiva 03-07-2013 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 2206913)
So this was Howard putting the cap on membership, not AKA? I didn't know that the schools had any pull with regard to intake (outside of "you can't bring in any new members").

From the one HBCU that I know of, yes, the school put a cap on membership.

Old_Row 03-07-2013 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 2206915)
Howard is like the Ole Miss/Bama of HBCUs (with regard to this topic).

Yeah that's what I was getting at. The NPC limits the number we can take with quotas so we can't take all the legacies if there are more than that. In this case it is the school doing the limiting but if you have 100 legacies and 50 spots that's obviously not going to work so some people are always going to be mighty upset.

Kevin 03-07-2013 11:46 AM

Anyone have a link to the Complaint?

MysticCat 03-07-2013 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 2206928)
Anyone have a link to the Complaint?

I've looked but haven't been able to find one.

GeekyPenguin 03-07-2013 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticCat (Post 2206929)
I've looked but haven't been able to find one.

I found it on PACER...13-cv-00262 in the DC District. The moms list themselves as Soror Lessie Colfield and Soror Sandra Compton in the caption, which I thought was interesting.

Kevin 03-07-2013 01:20 PM

It's not worth paying to see, but if someone has paid for it, I think it'd likely be an entertaining read.

naraht 03-07-2013 01:25 PM

Some links...
 
Mentioned on justia.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/dis...v00262/158557/

Judge is Rosemary M. Collyer.
http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Rosemary_Collyer

She is Caucasian and appointed to the DC District Court in 2002 by George W Bush. Her Bachelors degree is from Trinity College (which makes the chance she is in a sorority fairly small). However this is *not* her first case involving an NPHC sorority! She handled a case where Delta Sigma Theta sued DEREK & JAMAR PRODUCTION, LLC.

GeekyPenguin 03-07-2013 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 2206940)
It's not worth paying to see, but if someone has paid for it, I think it'd likely be an entertaining read.

Shoot me a PM - I tried PMing you but your box is full.

NinjaPoodle 03-08-2013 01:42 AM

Ok, so this is what's on Laurens FB & she left this on her public profile. Oh and apparently the complaint is availible online. Still searching for it.

"[Name] because it's not about grad chapter. Let me outline this for you.
My mom pledged Alpha Chapter at Howard University so all of my life this is where I knew I wanted to pledge. I get here, there's a line my freshman year (freshman can't pledge at Howard) my sophomore and junior year they are suspended from having lines because of hazing people. Finally, as a senior, my FIRST and LAST opportunity arises and I'm told AFTER submitting my application that senior legacies aren't being considered and sophomores and juniors who will have more opportunities are getting priority. To add insult to injury the ONLY reason senior legacies were not considered is because of an unauthorized legacy cap that didn't allow for senior legacies to even be considered. This cap came during the hiatus of no lines. I appreciate your concern and that your inquisitive enough to seek the truth. So as I said, it's not about grad chapter. It's about blocking people from having an opportunity just because they are seniors (beyond my control) and legacy (also beyond my control)."

Her AKA (different school) friends response
--"but private organizations have the opportunity to choose who they invite for membership. Just like Jack and Jill. There are PLENTY of mothers who want their children in jack and jill, but its a private organization that invites people into membership. it is NO ONE'S absolute right, legacy or not, to be an AKA. Patience probably would have served you better. Being a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha is about being in close connection with other women. Trying to force them to accept you completely perverts the sisterhood aspect of it and you would probably never get out of it what the vast majority of us do."

Kevin 03-08-2013 07:53 AM

We have the same issue in a lot of our old line chapters. They could take nothing but legacies and sometimes have to turn away a lot of them because they focus on individual quality, not necessarily who your parents are.

Like I said, this simply highlights that you can file a lawsuit over anything. Think the President is a Kenyan Muslim who is ineligible for office? The court clerk will stamp your complaint and you can have someone serve it on the President.

Do you think fluoride in your drinking water is there to make Americans docile and subject to mind control beams from the GPS satellites? The Court Clerk will file your complaint in and you can sue whoever you want to on that.

Is Rule 11 something the courts probably don't make enough use of? I think so.

sigmadiva 03-08-2013 07:55 AM

^^^^^ Just as I suspected. She felt entitled to obtain membership for the reasons I thought she would. :rolleyes:

Psi U MC Vito 03-08-2013 10:42 AM

So instead they should block people from an opportunity because of not being a senior (something out of their control) or not being a legacy (again something out of their control). I love the logic.

sigmadiva 03-08-2013 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito (Post 2207069)
So instead they should block people from an opportunity because of not being a senior (something out of their control) or not being a legacy (again something out of their control). I love the logic.

Perhaps, but its their org. They can use any reason they want for membership selection criteria.

We (the outsiders) don't have to like it or understand it. Its their org, they can run it how they please. AKA does not owe us outsiders any justification for their membership selection criteria.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.