In June, I wrote about Catholic University's questionable decision to deny students the right to form a campus chapter of the NAACP. I noted the similarity of this case to a situation that arose at the University of Miami in 2003, when students seeking to form a group called "Advocates for Conservative Thought" were denied recognition, ostensibly because the group would be "redundant" with existing conservative student groups. FIRE defended the would-be ACTs, convincing UM president Donna Shalala that the school was employing spurious reasoning that amounted to an ideological double standard when it denied recognition to the group. In June, I wrote that I would like to see FIRE take on the Catholic University case--and now they have. Read all about it on FIRE's website.

Of course they will get their NAACP chapter. One wonders why the CU administrators even made a weak resistance to the idea. Absurd. FIRE is correct to get involved and make short work of this turkey before Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson turn it into another lynching scenario.

They claim that the NAACP is interracial, but no one really takes that seriously. Might we have an ethnic breakdown of membership please? I thought not.

And why do they call it the NAACP? No one calls blacks colored people except racists. Is the NAACP a racist organization? If so, why not call it the NAAN? Or maybe they have too much invested in letterheads and business cards?

We are not exactly on the edge of our seats, here. IF CU didn't fold on this, eventually the EOC would get involved and heads would roll. So the end is a foregone conclusion.

I am unsure whether to take Rene's comment at face value or not. She insinuates that Rev Sharpton and Rev Jackson might try to stir up trouble for no reason. That's blatantly unfair. And what was the NAAN comment supposed to mean?
The NAACP is an old and honored organization known for its fairness and generosity. Every university and college in this land should have a chapter of the NAACP, to keep the schools honest.
America has a lot to answer for, a lot to pay back to African Americans. We do not want to see any type of backlash at this time of all times.

Several things come to mind on this one.

At one time the head of the NAACP was a white jewish guy.

I am conservative and find myself at odds with the ACLU in most of their cases. This is one time when I think the combination of the ACLU and FIRE would work wonders. This is a case where I think ACLU should be a party rather than in most of the dingbat cases where they choose to join. The combination of FIRE with Horowitz and co from the conservative angle and ACLU from its usual liberal angle would trump almost anything the president of CUA could come up with. What he did come up with makes no sense at all.

I understand that each new student organization creates a considerable expense and liability for the university. They try to limit the number of student organizations for that reason.

Nevertheless, resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

Alefa,

I think you must be thinking of the old NAACP. The current one is not that inclusive. Look at what happened this year at the convention. The leadership of the NAACP came out with a whole bunch of political statements before the convention even started and without checking with the rank and file of the organization. Then they complained because Pres Bush wouldn't come and speak to them. Since their political statements essentially told him to take a hike, he did. That is what the NAACP has come down to and that is why the statements concerning Al Sharpton and Jesse (extortion) Jackson ring true. It would be nice if the NAACP went back to the inclusiveness for which it used to be known. Until the current leadership is replaced that is not likely to happen.

Just look at the way they took Bill Cosby to task for his statements that the black community needs to clean up its own mess. Do you think that the leadership should make comments on what Bill Cosby said without checking with the membership? They are supposed to represent the membership. At the present moment that is the last thing they represent.

I'm shocked that a group like FIRE, which has gotten a conservative reputation, would take on this case where a liberal, pro-abortion group demands to have access to a Catholic university. Mfume says NAACP has no abortion stand; you echoed this in your June post, saying, "The NAACP does not have a formal position on abortion."

This is false, as can be seen by perusing the NAACP webpage. This policy was enacted by the board without consultation with the membership and without opportunity for discussion at the national convention.

See, for example, the February 24 NAACP Press Release, NAACP Board Takes Historical Pro-Choice Position. "Board Chair Julian Bond said, 'This is an issue of equal rights, and we are pleased to join those insisting on a woman's right to control her own body.'"