Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!hp-pcd!orstcs!boyd
From: boyd@orstcs.UUCP (boyd)
Newsgroups: net.college
Subject: Re: Are Mandatory PIRG Fees Legal?
Message-ID: <12000004@orstcs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-Jan-86 03:09:00 EST
Article-I.D.: orstcs.12000004
Posted: Thu Jan 30 03:09:00 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Feb-86 07:36:19 EST
References: <12000003@orstcs.UUCP>
Organization: Oregon State University - Corvallis, OR
Lines: 53
Nf-ID: #R:orstcs:12000003:orstcs:12000004:000:2326
Nf-From: orstcs!boyd    Jan 30 00:09:00 1986



     The stories about the student's who sued their university and won
for collecting mandatory, albeit refundable, PIRG fees is TRUE!

     The case is Galda v. Rutgers completed on Oct. 10, 1985. Here are some
interesting excerpts from the transcript:

"State university students brought action challenging university's policy
of funding independent outside organization that espoused and actively
promoted political and ideological philosophy which the students opposed
and did not wish to support." 

"[...]"

"State university failed to show any compelling state interest that would
justify overriding students' First Amendment rights, and thus could not
compel students to pay a specified sum, albeit refundable to independent
outside organization that espoused and actively promoted political and
ideological philosophy which some students opposed and did not wish to
support, despite university's contention that the fee was justified by
educational benefits associated with participation in the organizations
program, and absent evidence that the university, in its ordinary
operations, was unable to offer students the opportunity to learn about
environmental or consumer concerns or similar matters advocated by the
organization."

"[...]"

"At trial plaintiffs presented evidence that PIRG, in at least some, if not
a majority, of its activities is an entity devoted to political and
ideological objectives."

"[...]"

"The educational advantages [of PIRG] described in the testimony do not differ
from those that might be obtained by working with, or for an independent
organization such as the Republican or Democratic Party, or a clearly
religous group which has undertaken an active and vigorous proselytizing
program. As we have said, "it could not be seriously contended that student
fees could be funneled to such a group.""

"[...]"

"Although the training PIRG members may receive is considerable, there can
be no doubt that it is secondary to PIRG's stated objectives of a frankly
ideological bent. To that extent the educational benefits are only
"incidental" -arising from or accompanying the principle objectives -and
subordinate to the group's. function of promoting its political and
ideological aims." 

So the students won their case. It took them 6 years, but they won.
Interesting stuff. Huh?