[15749] in APO-L
Re: acui_net Important Court Ruling.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dan Stoffel)
Fri Dec 6 09:42:54 1996
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 08:38:14 -0600
Reply-To: Dan Stoffel <dstoffel@UX1.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
From: Dan Stoffel <dstoffel@UX1.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
In reply,
Here at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, our Student
Organization Resource Fee (SORF) is a $7 per student, per semester fee which
funds Student Legal Service, the Tenant Union, and registered organizations.
Over $300,000 is allocated by a student/staff board to registered student
organizations each year (we usually have about 850 register, and about
300-400 apply for an receive funding from this fee). However, this fee has
always been mandatory BUT REFUNDABLE; any student can have their $7 refunded
during the 6th full week of instruction (but they are then ineligible to use
the services of the Student Legal Service attorneys). Each semester, only
1-3% of students have been taking their refund, but we feel comfortable in
having that process in place, as hopefully it will help us avoid the same
sort of court battles.
--Dan Stoffel
At 05:19 PM 12/5/96 -0600, Tom Brown wrote:
>I just received this from another list and I am trying to get feedback
>from other campuses and also to get the information out to people.
>Specifically, is there a similar movement on your campus, is it big, what
>do others feel? I think the court has it all wrong and will ultimately
>destroy a significant part of college life.
>
>Anyway, here is a new discussion issue. Isn't the timing great
>
> In Leadership, Friendship & Service
>
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>+ Thomas E. Brown Jr. tebrown@lonestar.jpl.utsa.edu +
>+ +
>+ University of Texas at San Antonio +
>+ University Center +
>+ 6900 N Loop 1604 W +
>+ San Antonio, TX 78249 +
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 09:53:42 -0600 (CST)
>From: gfitch@COMP.UARK.EDU
>To: Patricia Nolfi <tnolfi@rci.rutgers.edu>
>Subject: Re: Wisconsin case
>
>Here is a copy of the article as reproduced from the Chronicle of Higher
>Education's Academ Today...
>
>Judge Says U. of Wisconsin Students
> May Not Be Forced to Pay Activity Fees
>
> A federal judge ruled Friday that the University of Wisconsin at
> Madison had violated the First Amendment rights of three students
> when it required them to pay activities fees that subsidized campus
> organizations they opposed.
>
> U.S. District Judge John C. Shabaz said that because the university
> had imposed the fees on the students without allowing them to opt
> out of its activities fund, it was denying the students their
>right not to
> speak and not to associate.
>
> "The university must provide some sort of opt-out provision or
> refund system for those students who object to subsidizing political
> and ideological student organizations with which they disagree,"
> Judge Shabaz wrote.
>
> The case may be part of a broader movement to challenge
> mandatory student-fee policies at universities across the United
> States. It followed a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court last year
in a
> case involving student fees at the University of Virginia. In
>that case,
> the Court's majority ruled that the university could not bar the
> allocation of student fees to a religious publication. Doing so, the
> Court said, was a violation of free- speech rights.
>
> Like the University of Virginia, the University of Wisconsin
collects
> mandatory student-activities fees as part of tuition packages that
> must be paid by all students. The fees, which total $331.50 each
> year for each student, cover activities and services such as
> intramural sports and the student government. About one-sixth of
> the fees collected is distributed by the student government to 140
> clubs and organizations on the campus.
>
> Three law-school students, who call themselves conservative
> Christians, objected to the allocation of their money to 18 groups,
> including Amnesty International, the International Socialist
> Organization, the Militant Student Union of the University of
> Wisconsin, the Ten Percent Society (a group for gay and lesbian
> students), and WISPIRG (an acronym for the Wisconsin Public
> Interest Research Group, which lobbies for environmental causes).
>
> Scott H. Southworth, Amy Shoepke, and Keith Bannach first took
> their complaint to the student association that disburses the
> student-activities money. They then asked the university's Board of
> Regents, which oversees the disbursement of money for student
> organizations, if they could be exempted from the mandatory fees.
> When they did not get a response, they sued the board.
>
> "Our frustration was building," Mr. Southworth said. "Many
> students have been objecting to the way the student association
> spends money and what it does with it."
>
> Mr. Southworth added that the aim of the lawsuit was not to
> deprive left-wing groups of financial support. "Liberal atheists
> should not have to pay for organizations they oppose either," he
> said. "People should be able to opt out."
>
> But the university argued in court that, by distributing students'
> money to a wide range of organizations, it was providing a
> "viewpoint-neutral forum" that served an educational purpose. Such
> a forum is similar to a city park or a university kiosk, said Pete
> Anderson, a lawyer for the university and a former assistant state
> Attorney General. "Anyone who wants to hold a rally in the park
> can do so; a university kiosk should be open to anyone. The
> university's provisions of money for postage or printing costs are
> sufficiently similar to be considered a forum."
>
> Judge Shabaz did not accept that argument. Portions of the fees, he
> wrote, "are being used clearly to fund political or ideological
> activity, not to provide a forum for the free exchange of ideas."
>
> Lawyers for both sides relied on the words of the Supreme Court
> when it ruled in Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the
> University of Virginia, the 1995 case about the use of student
> fees to support a religious magazine.
>
> In the Rosenberger case, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor noted in a
> concurring opinion "the possibility that the student fee is
>susceptible
> to a Free Speech Clause challenge by an objecting student that she
> should not be compelled to pay for speech with which she
> disagrees." Jordan Lorence, the lawyer for the Wisconsin students,
> said Justice O'Connor's opinion "signaled a new day" and handed
> him a compelling argument.
>
> The University of Wisconsin's lawyers backed up their arguments
> by noting the Supreme Court's analogy in the Rosenberger case of
> university clubs to a public "forum."
>
> Wisconsin has not yet decided whether it will appeal. In the
> meantime, the student government and some administrators are
> lamenting Judge Shabaz's ruling.
>
> "The practical impact will be to decrease the number of student
> organizations here," said Mary Rouse, the dean of students. "Many
> can only survive if they can get money through the fees." The
> students' ability to govern themselves has also been threatened, she
> said.
>
> -- Lisa Guernsey
>
>
>
>Gene Fitch, Jr.
>Assistant Dean for Judicial Affairs
>University of Arkansas
>ARKU M405
>Fayetteville, AR 72701
>Phone: (501) 575-5170
>FAX: (501) 575-7969
>
>
>
>
>
\\|//
(o o)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oOOo~(_)~oOOo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dan Stoffel ph: (217) 244-2418
Assistant Director fax: (217) 244-4294
284 Illini Union (MC-384) e-mail: dstoffel@uiuc.edu
1401 W. Green St. web: http://www.union.uiuc.edu
Urbana, IL 61801
Democracy is a beautiful thing, except for that part
about letting just any old yokel vote.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
