Who Are We?
Concerned Greek Alumni and Advisors (CGAA) is an informal association composed of USC Greek fraternity alumni and advisors who oppose USC's recent unilateral mandate prohibiting all incoming freshman and new students from joining men's social fraternities during their first semester of enrollment.
As CGAA's members represent fraternities of all sizes and philosophies, at their core they all believe USC's prohibition violates the rights under both the US and California Constitutions for individuals and fraternities, is arbitrarily discriminatory towards the Greek System only, and is even contrary to USC's very own express written policies governing individuals and campus organizations.
Why Was CGAA Formed?
CGAA was formed in reaction to USC's adamant and inflexible position regarding a sudden and unilateral ban on Greek rush for all of its first semester students, a refusal to engage in any reasonable dialogue on the issue, and a disingenuous "consultation" process regarding their stark and highly-impactful change to the overall USC Greek culture.
On September 13, 2017, the Vice President of Student Affairs, Ainsley Carry, stated to the Interfraternity Council (IFC) that USC was currently "exploring" the idea of banning Greek recruitment for all of its incoming first semester students.
Apparently that was not an honest statement made at the time.
For context, Carry had also formerly been the V.P. of Student Affairs at Auburn University where in 2011 his proposal for a similar recruitment ban was introduced, fought over, and eventually defeated.
Carry was then hired on at USC less than two years later to implement the exact same policy proposal made at Auburn University, and therefore it was not surprising that only sixteen days after his statement to USC’s IFC of merely "exploring" the issue that he simply announced the unilateral decision for a Greek System (only) recruitment ban on September 29.
What's most telling about this announcement is that on the day before, on September 28, USC's IFC proposed to the USC Administration that:
(1) it endorse an open public meeting where all interested parties and stakeholders could gather to express their views and positions on the recruitment ban, or
(2) a committee be formed comprised of all interested parties to closely study and evaluate the proposal, or
(3) at IFC's expense, USC agree to a non-binding mediation with an objective and neutral third party. After all, what could possibly be more reasonable amongst equals?
USC and Carry responded by simply issuing their ban...as they had clearly intended to from the start.
In the face of USC's patent unwillingness to engage in any truly open and collaborative dialogue with its own students and alumni who would most find themselves effected by a policy change such as a recruitment ban, what else was CGAA to do but join together and work, as previously had been done at Auburn University, to overturn this unfair ruling?