Opinion ID: 2350429
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The Student Groups' Attempts to Gain University Recognition

Text: GPGU made two attempts to gain University Recognition. The first was in academic year 1978-79 and the other immediately afterwards in the following academic year. On both occasions it obtained only Student Body Endorsement. Georgetown refused to grant it University Recognition or the accompanying tangible benefits. SAC first considered and approved GPGU's application on January 30, 1979. The same day, SAC issued the following statement: The SAC has granted a charter to the [GPGU] for the purpose of providing a forum where all students of Georgetown may come to understand the concerns of Gay Students. The recommendation for a charter does not mean that the SAC is making any statement on the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality or is implying that the University is making such a statement. Within a week the Student Senate ratified both the action of SAC in approving a Student Government Charter [8] and the statement that accompanied it. The following day William C. Schuerman, Associate Dean of Student Affairs, informed the Student Government that GPGU would not be recognized as an official activity of Georgetown University. [9] He wrote: The administration recognizes that the issue is both an educational and pastoral one. It is an issue that the University has addressed in an understanding manner. The University has been and will continue to be sensitive to the concerns of its gay students and the problems they face on the campus and in our society.... The University has acknowledged in a supportive way its gay students. These students may continue to organize, to express opinions, to publicize educationally related events. Gay students may use University facilities for educationally related purposes such as meetings, discussion groups, speakers, etc. The office and services of the Director of Student Activities are available to gay students for help and assistance in planning educationally related programs. All academic personnel and educational support services in the University are open and available to gay students for assistance and advice. It is the position of the University that this access by gay students to University resources: (1) Makes possible an atmosphere in which gay people as members of this University community can develop a sense of pride, self-worth and awareness. (2) Provides for the dissemination of educational information that may encourage understanding and dialogue between gay and non-gay people. (3) Allows for forums and open expression of opinions helpful in the development of responsible sexual ethics consonant with individual personal beliefs. (4) Allows students to gather together in an educational setting to share common interests and beliefs. [10] The University, however, will not endorse the [GPGU] as an official activity of its Student Affairs Programs. The University will not contribute to the support of this organization: (1) Through a grant of University funds. (2) By providing subsidized office space, telephone service, office supplies, and equipment. (3) By granting authorized use of the name Georgetown University. Georgetown University is a private University with a history and tradition which is specifically Catholic. University administrators must often make decisions in light of the conscience and value system identified with this tradition. The University, in terms of this responsibility cannot concur with the argument of its Student Government in this particular case, that official acknowledgment would not imply endorsement. This situation involves a controversial matter of faith and the moral teachings of the Catholic Church. Official subsidy and support of a gay student organization would be interpreted by many as endorsement of the positions taken by the gay movement on a full range of issues. While the University supports and cherishes the individual lives and rights of its students it will not subsidize this cause. Such an endorsement would be inappropriate for a Catholic University. Memorandum from Dean W. Schuerman to the Student Government (Feb. 6, 1979) (emphasis added). GPGU appealed Dean Schuerman's decision to the Dean of Student Affairs, William R. Stott, Jr., and met with him for that purpose. See letter from GPGU to Dean W. Stott, Jr. (Feb. 24, 1979). Dean Stott upheld the decision to den[y] endorsement to the [GPGU] as an official activity of the University's Student Affairs Program. Letter from Dean W. Stott, Jr., to GPGU (Mar. 5, 1979). He continued: The fact that the University has chosen not to grant endorsement to the [GPGU] as an approved student activity, does not indicate a lack of concern, a lack of sympathy for the Gay Student in particular, or students in general. It simply means that after the facts have been considered and discussion has taken place, there remains a point of disagreement as to whether endorsement of the [GPGU] as a student activity is appropriate for a Catholic University. The University's decision, therefore, is not a reflection on or a judgment of the personal choices of its members, but rather represents a judgment of what is appropriate for Georgetown as an institution. Id. (emphasis added). GPGU again appealed, this time to Reverend Aloysius P. Kelley, S.J., Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs. Taking issue with the equation of recognition and endorsement, GPGU wrote: We think it important to emphasize at the start that what we are seeking is recognition, not endorsement, as Dean Stott's response seems to imply. It is our belief, as well as that of the student government, that official recognition of our organization would not be construed as an endorsement of homosexual activity. Since this seems to be the major concern of the administration, we ask: Is it not possible for the administration to issue a statement saying that, in granting recognition to our group, it is not endorsing such activity? Letter from GPGU to Reverend A. Kelley, S.J. (Apr. 9, 1979) (not emphasized in original, remaining emphasis added). After meeting with GPGU representatives, Reverend Kelley denied its appeal. He relied upon the position taken by Deans Schuerman and Stott, and then added: As I tried to explain when we talked, I believe that our goals are essentially the same, but that the means to arrive at them are different. Georgetown will continue to show support for Gay Students but in a way which is deemed appropriate for this University. You mentioned that there may be additional ways in which the Administration could be supportive short of official recognition and I suggested that you discuss these with Mr. Schuerman. Letter from Reverend A. Kelley, S.J., to GPGU (Apr. 9, 1979). Reverend Kelley's denial of GPGU's appeal ended its attempt to gain University Recognition in academic year 1978-79. GPGU renewed its efforts early in the following academic year. This time it made separate visits to SAC to request a Student Government Charter and, later, University Recognition. SAC approved GPGU's request for a Student Government Charter on November 13 and its decision was ratified by the Student Senate on November 18, 1979. SAC accompanied its approval with the following statement: The [GPGU] convinced the SAC, with both their written constitution and their oral presentation, that they represent a distinct group of students on this campus whose existence we as student representatives are bound to acknowledge. Furthermore, by enumeration of their educational functions (e.g. answering questions in nursing classes, enlightening RAs, etc.) the [GPGU] depicted itself as, to borrow from the criteria, a positive force within the University community. As had happened the previous year, Dean Schuerman wrote immediately to the Student Government to point out that the administration did not accept the action of SAC as giving official recognition to GPGU. Memorandum from Dean W. Schuerman to the Student Government (Nov. 21, 1979). The reasons he gave were essentially borrowed from his letter of the previous year. Memorandum from Dean W. Schuerman to the Student Government (Feb. 6, 1979) ( quoted supra at 19-21). Undaunted, GPGU again appeared before SAC two weeks later and requested University Recognition to add to the Student Body Endorsement it had already received. Both SAC and the Student Senate voted in favor of GPGU despite the administration's recent announcement that it would not accede to this request. At the end of 1979, therefore, GPGU was awaiting the University's reaction to the favorable response it had won from the Student Government. On January 15, 1980, in an effort to clarify its position, GPGU requested the administration to furnish it with a statement as to the group's status. This was provided by the Director of Student Activities, Debbie L. Gottfried. After repeating the administration's previous reasons for denying University Recognition, she added: As I have told you and other gay students, the services of my office are available to you for help and assistance in planning educationally related programs. I cannot stress to you enough the sincerity behind this offer. I cannot offer any possibility of the University's changing its position on what it feels would be interpreted as endorsement and official support of the full range of issues associated with this cause. Letter from D. Gottfried to GPGU (Jan. 18, 1980) (emphasis added); see also memorandum from Dean W. Schuerman to D. Gottfried (Jan. 16, 1980). Both GPGU and the Student Government requested that this decision be reconsidered. Letter from the Student Government to Dean W. Schuerman (Feb. 5, 1980). As had happened the previous year, GPGU met with Dean Schuerman, but failed to persuade him that University Recognition was appropriate. Dean Schuerman wrote: In my judgment, official recognition by the University of a gay student organization would be interpreted by many as endorsement, support, and approval of the positions taken by the gay movement on a full range of issues. This would be inappropriate for a Catholic University. While I recognize your disagreement with this position, I was not dissuaded by your argument that the University could on the one hand grant official recognition (defined by Student Government's recently updated criteria as endorsement of the various co-curricular activities undertaken by a specific club) and on the other hand, disclaim endorsement of the major activities which, by definition, are associated with a gay organization. ... [T]he University does not recognize the [GPGU] as an official activity of the Student Affairs program and will not subsidize this cause. Letter from Dean W. Schuerman to GPGU (Feb. 21, 1980) (emphasis added). Continuing in the pattern set the previous year, GPGU unsuccessfully appealed Dean Schuerman's decision to Dean Stott and Reverend Donald Freeze, S.J., Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost. Letter from Dean W. Stott, Jr., to GPGU (Mar. 14, 1980); letter from Reverend D. Freeze, S.J., to GPGU (Mar. 31, 1980). This time it appealed, without success, all the way to President T. Healy. Letter from GPGU to President T. Healy, S.J. (Apr. 1, 1980); letter from President T. Healy, S.J., to GPGU (Apr. 29, 1980). The day after President Healy's ultimate denial of University Recognition, this action was filed in Superior Court. By then, a similar chain of events had taken place at the Law Center. On December 6, 1979, GRC had submitted its application to become a recognized student activity to the Law Center Committee on Student and Faculty Life (CSFL). Its petition was approved by CSFL on February 14, 1980. Two weeks later, David J. McCarthy, Jr., Dean of the Law Center, told CSFL that he would not implement either recognition or funding of the proposed organization. Memorandum from Dean D. McCarthy, Jr., to CSFL (Feb. 26, 1980). Dean McCarthy's reasons for denying GRC official recognition were couched in terms almost identical to those Dean Schuerman had given GPGU. See memorandum from Dean W. Schuerman to the Student Government (Feb. 6, 1979) ( quoted supra at 19-21). After this action had been filed, President Healy informed Dean McCarthy that his earlier decision denying GPGU University Recognition on the main campus applied equally and for the same reasons to GRC at the Law Center. Letter from President T. Healy, S.J., to Dean D. McCarthy (May 8, 1980) (The University's decision is not a reflection on or a judgment of the personal choices of its individual members but rather reflects a judgment of what is appropriate for Georgetown as an institution). [11] A letter to the same effect was sent to the Chancellor of the Medical Center, Georgetown University's one remaining campus, although no similar group there had sought University Recognition. Letter from President T. Healy, S.J., to Chancellor M. McNulty (May 8, 1980). Thus, at the time this action was filed, GPGU had obtained Student Body Endorsement at the Main Campus and GRC had obtained its apparent equivalent at the Law Center. Neither group had been successful in its attempts to obtain University Recognition or the additional benefits that status carries with it.