University of Virginia Library

While one may not be able to
convince a fellow student that a
ban on the use of segregated
facilities is philosophically right,
it is nonetheless important that
there is nothing unethical about
the recent decision of the Student
Council to prohibit the use of
segregated facilities by University
organizations. Mr. Tison would
have us believe that morality is
extrinsic to law; that if law is
made other than in vacuo, morality
is somehow omitted from consideration.

If one can believe that, especially
a law student, then we are all
worrying to a petty thing indeed.
In fact, every expression of the
legislature is grounded on that
amount of moral principle that a
voting majority can agree on.
Social legislation is the foremost
example, but even the purest
economically motivated legislation
is steeped in the moral considerations
of economic theory; for what
goes more quickly to the individualist
moralist's heart than disposal
of property.

But, even dispensing with considerations
of morality in law,
Mr. Tison makes an even more
fundamental error. Legislative
power is not restricted to the
Congress, the state assemblies, and
municipal councils. Any group
can agree on rules of conduct for
its activities as long as these rules
do not exceed the powers reserved
to them by supervisory bodies.

Such rules, of course, cannot
affect anyone beyond the membership
of the group. Those subject
to a particular rule-making body
may be defined territorially as by
state lines, or associatively, as by
congressional membership requirements.
Would Mr. Tison have us
believe that he is not subject to
University regulations because they
are not passed by Congress, the
Virginia legislature, or the Albemarle
County Board?

The only question remaining
then is whether the power to pass
a ban on usage of segregated
facilities by recognized student activities
is reserved by the Student
Council. Mr. Tison says that "if
students are not assisting or encouraging
the violation of any
law...their conduct does not fall
into any of the categories which
the University may properly prohibit."
It seems more than slightly
redundant to assert that the University's
regulatory powers are
limited to what is already regulated.

In exchange for submitting to
the regulation, the various organizations
receive either funds or the
right to use the University's name
or both. Individual students who
believe in freedom of associations
as the moral issue of our day can
continue to use Fry's Springs. The
University has said no more than
that its name will not be used by
such moralists.