‘No rational basis’: Court annuls Alpha Chi Rho suspension
Corey Henry | Senior Staff Photographer
After reviewing witness interviews and camera footage of the incident, the conduct board said on Jan. 28 that it was not able to prove that any members of the fraternity or its guests said a racial slur.
Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.
A state Supreme Court judge ruled in favor of Syracuse University’s chapter of the Alpha Chi Rho fraternity Wednesday, annulling a suspension imposed by a high-ranking SU official.
The university suspended Alpha Chi Rho, also known as Crow, in November 2020 after it determined that members and guests of the fraternity were involved in shouting a racial slur at a Black woman on College Place.
Crow initially won an appeal in February 2020 that lifted the sanctions placed on the fraternity. But Dolan Evanovich, a former SU official who oversaw the university’s conduct system, later overturned the findings of SU’s appeal board and reinstated Crow’s suspension.
The fraternity sued SU and Evanovich in June.
Wednesday’s ruling affirmed that no members of Crow “uttered any derogatory or racially offensive statements” and that Evanovich’s determination “has no rational basis.”
The judge also said that SU violated its policies when it refused to allow an attorney to represent the fraternity at its hearing when it knew the allegations against Crow included allegations of sexual harassment in addition to racial bias.
“The record is clear: Alpha Chi Rho did nothing wrong,” the judge wrote in the ruling.
The judge denied a petition by SU and Evanovich to dismiss the lawsuit.
SU respectfully disagrees with Wednesday’s ruling, said Sarah Scalese, senior associate vice president for university communications, in a statement.
“In this particular case, the panel found that the guest engaged in a verbal assault on a member of our community,” Scalese said. “We will not tolerate hate on our campus — not from our community members and not from their guests.”
Students and student organizations are responsible for the conduct of the guests they bring to campus, and SU will continue to hold the hosts of guests accountable, Scalese said.
There are no university policies that make an organization responsible for the actions of its guests at an event or gathering.
SU’s University Conduct Board found on Dec. 19 that four members of Crow who had been suspended were not responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct, letters sent to the students show. Disciplinary proceedings continued against the fraternity as a whole.
The conduct board sent a letter to Crow on Jan. 28 stating that the fraternity was not responsible for any conduct violations. The board was “unable to determine what exactly was said” to the student who made the allegations against the fraternity but found it likely that a guest of the fraternity, a student from Rutgers University, “startled or offended” her and tried to look up her dress, the letter states.
After reviewing witness interviews and camera footage of the incident, the conduct board said on Jan. 28 that it was not able to prove that any members of the fraternity or its guests said a racial slur, the conduct board ruling states.
More stories on Alpha Chi Rho’s suspension and lawsuit:
- SU suspends Alpha Chi Rho fraternity after code of conduct violations
- Alpha Chi Rho on probation, no longer suspended
- SU defends Alpha Chi Rho suspension in lawsuit filing
- Alpha Chi Rho fraternity sues SU to reverse suspension
- ‘Alpha Chi Rho appeals suspension from SU
Though the victim alleged that several members of the group were chanting the N-word, none of her family members who were present reported hearing the chanting, the board said. Video footage of the incident shows a guest of the fraternity briefly approaching the woman’s car ahead of the rest of the group but does not show any reaction from the group, the board said.
When the fraternity’s lawyer reached out to Sheriah Dixon, director of SU’s Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities, to follow up about a paperwork technicality, Dixon claimed that the Jan. 28 conduct board finding was sent by another SU employee in error, emails between the lawyer and Dixon show. The conduct board was actually still deliberating, Dixon wrote.
Dixon informed the fraternity on Feb. 11 that the conduct board had issued another opinion that now found Crow responsible for violating SU’s Code of Student Conduct. SU suspended the fraternity for one year.
The university argued that the person seen on camera approaching the woman at College Place and trying to look up her dress was an “informal guest” of Crow, making “the organization responsible for his actions and the impact they had on the Syracuse University community.”
After the fraternity filed an appeal, the University Appeals Board overturned the conduct board’s decision on Feb. 21 and removed the sanctions placed Feb. 11 on Crow. The appeals board said it could not find any university policies that make an organization responsible for the actions of its guests during any event or gathering.
A week later, Evanovich announced he was rejecting the decision of the appeals board and finding the fraternity responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct. Though the conduct board had been “unable to determine what exactly was said” to the woman, Evanovich decided that “it was more likely than not that the guest used a racial slur,” a Mar. 3 letter from Evanovich to Alpha Chi Rho shows.
Published on March 10, 2021 at 11:01 pm
Contact Michael: msessa@syr.edu | @MichaelSessa3
