The Badger Herald

NEWS

Catholic group sues university

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Joanna Pliner:

Plan B debate takes stage at forum (March 24, 2006)
Chemistry professor makes two 'firsts' in winning Howe honor (October 24, 2006)
Students await Union decision (November 13, 2006)
ASM textbook plan to take flight in fall (April 26, 2006)
Player faces felony charge (December 1, 2006)

by Joanna Pliner

Monday, November 13, 2006

Charges of religious discrimination are bringing several members of the University of Wisconsin System and the UW-Madison administration to federal court.

The UW Roman Catholic Foundation filed a lawsuit against 17 members of the UW System Board of Regents, UW System President Kevin Reilly and four UW administrators Thursday, accusing the defendants of violating the First Amendment rights of UWRCF by making efforts not to fund the organization based on its religious focus.

The four UW-Madison administrators on the list of defendants include Chancellor John Wiley, Interim Dean of Students Lori Berquam, Associate Dean of Students Elton Crim and Director of the Student Organization Office Yvonne Fangmeyer.

UWRCF spokesperson Tim Kruse said the university has discriminated against his organization for four years, the latest incident being the recent regulation requiring a group to be a registered student organization as a precondition to receiving student-segregated fee funding from the Student Services Finance Committee. Kruse said the university implemented that policy with the sole purpose of keeping UWRCF — which was not a RSO — from being funded.

"We could tell we were being discriminated against, but we didn't know our rights," Kruse said, explaining why UWRCF waited four years to sue the university in federal court. "We met with the chancellor directly; we met with SSFC ad nauseam; we wrote the dean of students office ad nauseam and got nowhere — so it was just a matter of trying every other possible avenue of relief before we actually went to federal court."

Berquam said she was surprised to learn UWRCF filed the lawsuit, but that it makes sense because she knew UWRCF was frustrated with SSFC's funding decision.

The RSO policy recently implemented at UW-Madison is UW System policy that UW-Madison had not been adhering to before.

"The bigger question is does system policy violate their rights," Berquam said. "What's hard here is the whole question of should student monies be used for religious things … and what do our students want their resources, their monies, going toward?"

Kruse said the case UWRCF is using audio files, written documents and testimony from people within the university to make its case.

UWRCF is not trying to keep the university from collecting student-segregated fees, according to Kruse, but rather asserting that the university cannot collect segregated fees while treating UWRCF differently than other student organizations.

"We wouldn't have filed it if we didn't have a very strong confidence that we are in the right," Kruse said, adding that more than 400 faculty and staff at UW have gone through UWRCF. "It's not like everyone on the inside [of UW] are rooting for the university."

Kruse said the four UW administrators on the list of defendants were charged because they all took "an active role in advocating discrimination" against UWRCF or put forth efforts to marginalize its funding.

Members of SSFC — all of whom are students — also contributed to the alleged discrimination according to Kruse, but UWRCF decided to "forgive them because of their age."

However, SSCF Chair Zach Frey said UWRCF could not include SSFC in the list of defendants because SSFC merely makes suggestions to the Associated Students of Madison Student Council regarding budget decisions, and the Student Council passes those suggestions on to the chancellor, who then reports to the Board of Regents for the final decision.

"I would say that we're trying to comply with system policies and regent policies," Frey said. "And as long as we're meeting those requirements, I don't think that it would be possible or make any sense."

SSFC is scheduled to hear UWRCF's budget at the committee's meeting tonight. UWRCF will also be requesting "contract group status" tonight, according to Frey.

Contract status would allow UWRCF to hire employees outside the university and receive funding from student-segregated fees.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (November 13, 2006 @ 8:13am):

Ironic, isn't it, that UWRCF says UW cannot treat them any differently than any other student organization, yet they are treated differently from other organizations because they treat students differently based on religion -- they don't get seg fees because they discriminate against non-Catholics.

As far as I'm concerned, they can have their seg fees when they stop discriminating against non-Catholics. Until then, they don't deserve a penny.

Anonymous (November 13, 2006 @ 8:27am):

I am a student. I do not want my segregated fees allotted to "religous things". This is a state school. No need to fund part of a church, which is where UWRCF currently stands. No RSO status? Good, because only a fraction of their board is made up of students.

However, I do not condemn them for the lawsuit. Perhaps extremek, but we are all at least granted the opportunity to fight at a time we feel discriminated against.

UWRCF is not being discriminated against.

-E.

Anonymous (November 13, 2006 @ 9:24am):

SSFC Chair Zach Frey is obviously out of his element - he shouldn't be opining about whether it would be "possible" to institute suit against his group. All it would take to institute suit against his group is to name it in the suit's caption. As an unicorporated association, each of its members would be individually subject to process. Whether the group had final sway over the decision to discriminate is also not dispositive. If the group can to be shown to have contributed to the illegality, the members are exposed to individual liability. Frey needs to shut his trap before somebody shoves a summons in it. --Signed, 23 year lawyer.

Anonymous (November 13, 2006 @ 10:02am):

I question if Wiley and the UW legal team understands how giving away funds in a forum that is viewpoint neutral in no way can violate the Establishment Clause.