## Facts

- Police conducted a drug raid at an off-campus fraternity house associated with the Pa Gamma Sigma Chapter of Pi Lambda Phi Fraternity and found drugs; several members were arrested, including the chapter’s risk manager.
- The University initiated student-organization disciplinary proceedings and concluded the chapter bore responsibility based on inadequate oversight, even though a panel found no direct link between the chapter as an entity and the drug activity.
- The University sanctioned the chapter by revoking its recognized student-organization status for one year and withdrawing recognition-related benefits and privileges.
- The chapter pursued internal appeals within the University, but the sanctions were upheld.
- The fraternity entities, members, and prospective members sued the University, the City, and individual officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of First Amendment freedom of association (intimate and expressive) and Fourteenth Amendment equal protection.
- The district court granted summary judgment to all defendants, and the plaintiffs appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a university social fraternity chapter constitutes a protected “intimate association” under the First Amendment such that revocation of recognition infringes that right.
2. Whether the chapter engaged in constitutionally protected “expressive association,” and whether the revocation of recognition impermissibly burdened that right.
3. Whether revoking recognition and allegedly treating fraternities differently from other student organizations violated the Equal Protection Clause.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the defendants.
- The court held the chapter was not an “intimate association” as defined by Supreme Court doctrine.
- The court held the chapter failed to show it engaged in constitutionally protected expressive association; in any event, withdrawing recognition did not significantly burden members’ ability to associate or express views.
- The court held there was no equal protection violation; differential treatment of fraternities was supported by a rational basis.

## Legal Principles

- Constitutional protection for association includes (1) intimate association protecting highly personal relationships and (2) expressive association protecting groups formed to engage in First Amendment activity.
- Intimate-association status turns on attributes such as size, selectivity, purpose, and relative seclusion; large, non-secluded, socially oriented groups generally fall outside the protected category.
- Expressive-association protection requires a record showing an identifiable expressive purpose; social and recreational association alone is insufficient.
- A university’s withdrawal of official recognition and related benefits, without prohibiting members from meeting or speaking privately, may be too indirect a burden to amount to a constitutional violation.
- When no suspect class or fundamental right is implicated, differential treatment among student groups is reviewed under rational basis and will be upheld if supported by any legitimate justification, including heightened accountability concerns tied to off-campus residential fraternities.

## Conclusion

The Third Circuit held that a social fraternity chapter was not constitutionally protected as an intimate association, failed to establish protected expressive association or a significant burden from loss of recognition, and could not show an equal protection violation under rational-basis review; summary judgment for the defendants was affirmed.


Pi Lambda Phi Fraternity, Inc. v. Univ. of Pittsburgh, 229 F.3d 435 (3d Cir. 2000)