UNC-Chapel Hill Non-Discrimination Policy Upheld


According to an Associated Press article posted on 365gay.com News, a federal judge has thrown out a case challenging the non-discrimination policy of The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH).

Alpha Iota Omega, a Christian fraternity, has sued the school after UNC-CH revoked their school affiliation when they refused to sign the policy which forbad discriminition based upon religion and sexual orientation, among others.

The 2004 case was thrown out by Judge Frank Bullock Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina because UNC-CH changed the policy in May 2005Â to allow religious and political student groups and fraternities to deny membership on the basis of deeply held group beliefs. A similar policy change was recently made at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG).

The new policy change does not affect discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, although arguments have been made, especially on the UNCG campus, that a loophole could be found to discriminate against LGBT students based upon their “belief” that their sexual orientation is an intrinsic, human characteristic.

According to the article:

Alpha Iota Omega was reinstated in September 2005 following a court injunction issued six months earlier.

Group members were not available for comment Thursday.

Chancellor James Moeser applauded the judge’s decision.

“There is value in having a non-discrimination policy at a public university,” Moeser said in the statement. “Our objective remains: seeking to carefully balance our students’ First Amendment rights with the rights guaranteed by the U.S. and North Carolina Constitutions.”

The Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, which represented Alpha Iota Omega in court, was disappointment with Bullock’s decision. The group noted that the lawsuit did lead to a change in policy at the university.


Comments
One Response to “UNC-Chapel Hill Non-Discrimination Policy Upheld”
  1. Ryan says:

    Ok… so I’m missing what the point is?

    The case no longer had standing because it had been resolved out of court, why is this news? The article on 365gay is an AP stub, but they’ve changed the title to “U North Carolina Gay Rights Policy Upheld”… which is quite obviously incorrect. They’ve upheld a policy that could potentially be used against gays.

    And really, the decision to dismiss the case didn’t uphold anything, it just saved everyone time since the case didn’t need to be rehashed in court.

    Why the ADF is dissapointed is what I don’t understand… they proclaimed resounding victory when the injunction was issued, when the policy was changed, and when AIO was reinstated. Why do they care if it didn’t go to court, it didn’t need to.

Leave A Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.