The Student Senate has debated whether to recognize a chapter of Turning Point USA on Lehigh\u2019s campus since March, following a recommendation for approval from the Club Affairs Committee.\u00a0<\/p>\n
A lack of Senate transparency, miscommunications and administrative interference in TPUSA\u2019s approval process have left some students frustrated, particularly amid ongoing conversations about racism and campus climate.<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n On March 3, senators voted three times against approving TPUSA for a trial period. Administrators, including Provost Nathan Urban, encouraged approval in the name of free speech<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n Many senators cited disagreement with the right-wing organization \u2014 founded by the late political activist Charlie Kirk \u2014 and its messaging as their reason for disapproval.\u00a0<\/p>\n After the denial, two senators who didn\u2019t identify themselves motioned internally for a re-vote. The vote, scheduled for the Senate\u2019s April 7 meeting<\/a>, was postponed when the meeting ran late.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n On April 9, Senate President-elect Drew Smith, \u201827, announced the Senate wouldn\u2019t re-vote<\/a> on TPUSA\u2019s trial period after the senators who proposed reconsideration retracted their request following heated debate at the April 7 meeting.\u00a0<\/p>\n The Brown and White spoke with student senators, a TPUSA executive board member and faculty about the approval process. Discussion focused on internal Senate communication and what comes next for both the Senate and TPUSA.\u00a0<\/p>\n Club approval process and vote of disapproval<\/p>\n All clubs seeking Senate recognition must submit an application to the Club Affairs Committee and be evaluated using a point-based rubric<\/a> across eight categories. Organizations that pass are recommended for a full Senate vote.\u00a0<\/p>\n Smith said Ryan Evans, \u201829, the former TPUSA president and a former senator, submitted the organization\u2019s application and completed the standard interview process.\u00a0<\/p>\n Edward Grinnan, \u201829, a member of the Student Outreach Committee, said Evans was on the Club Affairs Committee during the process but wasn\u2019t allowed to complete a rubric for his own organization.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cNot only did (Evans) work closely with (the Club Affairs Committee), he would have theoretically had inside knowledge of how the rubric works,\u201d Grinnan said. \u201cSo (one) would think someone on that committee would know the correct and best way to get a passing score on the Club Affairs rubric.\u201d<\/p>\n Smith said all committee members undergo training at the start of the semester to ensure unbiased judgement. He also said members involved with an applying club neither complete a rubric nor evaluate any organization during that cycle.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe only potential source of bias would be familiarity with the committee\u2019s members, but that goes for any club\u2019s executive board having any ties with any member on the Club Affairs team,\u201d Smith said. \u201cGiven the bias training and uniformity of each rubric\u2019s grading, the objectivity of the Club Affairs team \u2014 in my eyes \u2014 still remains intact.\u201d<\/p>\n Grinnan said Evans didn\u2019t identify himself as TPUSA\u2019s president nor formally recuse himself until after the first round of voting on March 3.\u00a0<\/p>\n Smith, Grinnan and Ryan Hatfield, \u201826, chair of the Club Affairs Committee, confirmed Evans has since resigned from both the Senate and TPUSA.\u00a0<\/p>\n Evans also confirmed his resignation and his plan to transfer next semester in an email to The Brown and White. He\u2019s since joined the executive board of a new campus chapter of BridgeUSA<\/a>, which aims to address political polarization through dialogue.\u00a0<\/p>\n Evans said after TPUSA was denied, he no longer identified with the organization and instead joined BridgeUSA to connect people across the political spectrum.\u00a0<\/p>\n The current president of TPUSA, who requested The Brown and White keep them anonymous to prevent impact on future professional opportunities and to avoid any unwanted personal harassment, previously served as the organization\u2019s secretary. They said they were present when the organization first presented to the Club Affairs Committee.<\/p>\n TPUSA received a passing score on the committee\u2019s rubric, leading to its recommendation for a full Senate vote.\u00a0<\/p>\n The president said those scores were allegedly leaked before the committee presented the Senate, prompting a petition opposing TPUSA that gathered more than 700 student signatures.\u00a0<\/p>\n They said the petition focused less on TPUSA itself and more on quotes from \u201cThe Charlie Kirk Show\u201d that some students viewed as problematic.<\/p>\n \u201cTurning Point as an organization is separate from whatever Kirk said on his podcast out of context,\u201d the president said. \u201cEven the Provost, Nathan Urban, was saying how we shouldn\u2019t be discriminating against people that we disagree with.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The president said they weren\u2019t given an official reason for the denial after the March 3 vote. They also said senators allegedly discussed changing rubric scores to zero in the \u201cbenefit to community\u201d category.\u00a0<\/p>\n According to Senate bylaws<\/a>, club officers must be notified of approval or denial within five academic days. The president said they emailed the Senate three times and didn\u2019t receive a response for over a month.<\/p>\n They said the Senate responded only after they copied TPUSA\u2019s faculty adviser, Lehigh\u2019s assistant general counsel.\u00a0<\/p>\n Re-vote conversations and rubric backlash\u00a0<\/p>\n Following the denial, two senators motioned to rescind their votes and reconsider TPUSA. During discussions on April 7, senators debated whether personal opinion should factor into approval decisions.\u00a0<\/p>\n Mariana Rold\u00e1n, \u201828, chair of the Senate\u2019s DEI committee, said much of the debate centered on TPUSA\u2019s passing rubric score.\u00a0<\/p>\n Hatfield said he strongly supports the rubric system and that every club is entitled to reliable justification for why it was denied.<\/p>\n \u201cWithout that specific feedback that the rubric allows for us to provide, (our) decisions and (our) feedback can be very broad or very inconsistent from club to club,\u201d Hatfield said.\u00a0<\/p>\n Political science professor Dean Caivano, who works with many senators in his classes, said students have raised concerns about the club-vetting process and lack of transparency.<\/p>\n While he said rubrics can be useful, he emphasized the importance of incorporating student perspectives.<\/p>\n He also said a rubric may not fully capture concerns about organizations such as TPUSA, including targeting minority communities<\/a> with harmful language<\/a> and hate<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cMy hope is that (the) Senate goes back to the drawing board and recognizes that while a rubric may be a helpful tool, it may not be the only tool,\u201d Caivano said. \u201cHaving the voices of students, perhaps more involved in the club process affair, may be something the Senate could greatly benefit from.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Rold\u00e1n said while the rubric promotes objectivity, it can\u2019t ignore senators\u2019 opinions.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s just human factors that you can\u2019t remove from the whole process,\u201d she said. \u201cYou can\u2019t expect Senate to just fall under that rubric, right? I feel like the emphasis on the rubric was just falling on deaf ears because it was something that we had already been told in the past and it didn\u2019t work to change our vote then.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Where TPUSA stands now\u00a0<\/p>\n Rold\u00e1n said she doesn\u2019t expect further Senate discussion on TPUSA this semester after multiple failed votes.<\/p>\n She said the denial applies only to the current semester and TPUSA may reapply in the future.\u00a0<\/p>\n The president said a TPUSA chapter existed at Lehigh in 2018 that functioned more as a friend group than an official club. They said interest in reviving the group began after Kirk was shot in September.\u00a0<\/p>\n Rold\u00e1n said a senator who knew a student that went to Lehigh when the previous chapter was on campus said it was allegedly banned because it hosted an event that involved slurs and hate speech. But she said there is no written evidence that confirms this happened, likely because they weren\u2019t a Senate-recognized club.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n TPUSA\u2019s president said they plan to appeal the decision to the Dean of Students, arguing TPUSA met all rubric requirements.\u00a0<\/p>\n They said their primary concern is that the Senate ignored the Club Affairs assessment and instead allegedly tried to manipulate the score and deny the organization for no official reason that they\u2019re aware of.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIf there\u2019s no criteria for how you\u2019re allowing clubs to be recognized, then it\u2019s just a bunch of students in a room who are just voting based on how they feel,\u201d the president said.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Smith confirmed the president has filed a report with the dean.\u00a0<\/p>\n The president said TPUSA would focus on discussions about topics like capitalism and broader political issues, distinguishing it from the College Republicans\u2019 focus on elections.\u00a0<\/p>\n Smith said concerns about potential lawsuits have been raised, noting other TPUSA<\/a> chapters have sued<\/a> universities over free speech issues.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n He said administrators from Lehigh\u2019s General Counsel viewed Senate bylaws documents after TPUSA\u2019s application, which raised concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cAs the Vice President of Internal Affairs, I spend too much time looking at the Student Senate bylaws,\u201d Smith said. \u201cExceptionally rarely \u2014 before Turning Point\u2019s application to become a club \u2014 did I ever see anyone else on the Student Senate bylaws document.\u201d<\/p>\n However, Smith said there\u2019s no evidence of a pending lawsuit and he\u2019s not concerned in the immediate future.\u00a0<\/p>\n Community reaction<\/p>\n Rold\u00e1n said the administration can\u2019t address racism<\/a> on campus<\/a> while supporting the approval of an organization like TPUSA. She also said the Senate\u2019s decision sends a broader message about its stance<\/a> on campus issues.\u00a0<\/p>\n Rold\u00e1n said Urban\u2019s stance on TPUSA is easy for him to assume as a straight, white man who wouldn\u2019t be targeted if TPUSA were to exist at Lehigh.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think there\u2019s any intentional malignance behind (Urban\u2019s) championing of Turning Point,\u201d Rold\u00e1n said. \u201cI think it\u2019s just blissful ignorance and blissful naivety when it comes to what he thinks won\u2019t happen if they\u2019re allowed on campus.\u201d<\/p>\n Despite the controversy, she said the situation has encouraged conversations about transparency and communication within the Senate.\u00a0<\/p>\n Caivano said the approaching end of the semester may limit further discussion.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe way in which this administration has put their eggs in the basket in support of approval (of TPUSA), and the way this administration has, in my opinion, consistently failed to properly address ongoing racial issues with the student population speaks to, their approach,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd their approach may be to simply run out the clock on the semester and to hope.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n He also expressed frustration that more faculty aren\u2019t engaging in discussions about the potential impact of TPUSA.\u00a0<\/p>\n