A letter sent of behalf of NIU Students for Sensible Drug Policy to President John Peters Thursday alleged that the Student Association Senate violated the U.S. Constitution in its treatment of the group.

The letter, written by a representative from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, outlines the alleged “threats to freedom of expression and freedom of association” by the denial of recognition of the NIU SSDP as a social justice group by the SA.

According to the letter, the SA Senate must also allow all groups to be funded by student fees; it cannot discriminate based on political or religious viewpoints.

In a phone interview with Jeremy Orbach, president and founder of the NIU chapter of SSDP, he said Greg Brady, deputy chief counsel of the university, has been made aware of all of the evidence Orbach claims to have against the SA.

Orbach also said the matter will be taken care of quickly and outside of the court system

“We don’t plan on filing any sort of lawsuit as long as the cooperation [from NIU] is there,” Orbach said.

Eric Sterling, a member of the Board of Directors of SSDP at the national level, said the individual senators are potentially liable for denying constitutional rights to the SSDP and would be potential defendants in a civil suit.

The civil suit would be seeking recognition for NIU SSDP, change in the procedures of the senate, change in the language of the senate bylaws, and/or monetary damages, Sterling said.

He said the legal charges would cost the Illinois taxpayers the cost of NIU’s defense.

The Northern Star attempted to contact several members of the SA Senate and other recipients of the letter from FIRE, but all calls were referred to Brian Hemphill, vice president of Student Affairs and Enrollment Management.

Hemphill said the SA has placed on hold decisions of student organization recognition and funding until a full legal review of the letter has been made.

Orbach said he has pursued his course of action not because SSDP would be denied funding if it were a political organization, but because it has not been treated fairly by the SA.

“We don’t want the money,” he said. “The money is not the issue. We just want to meet on campus.”

SA-recognized political groups receive the same privileges on campus as social justice and advocacy groups except that they cannot be funded by students fees, which make up the SA Senate budget.

Orbach said the organization did not want to settle for recognization as political group because several members thought it did not reflect their mission.

The SA Senate voted on Oct. 24 to postpone SSDP’s recognition until Nov. 7 pending its reclassification as a political organization, which would make it ineligible for funding.

According to the letter from FIRE, the SA’s definitions of political and religious organizations are “hopelessly vague and overbroad” and “unworkable in practice.”

The SA amended its bylaws on Nov. 7 to include definitions of political and religious organizations, neither of which can receive SA funding.

The SA bylaws define an organization as political if part of its activities or purpose is to run informational campaigns or lobby federal, state or local legislative bodies.

Orbach said he believes SSDP is a social justice and advocacy group. He said he used the federal tax law definition of a political group when determining SSDP’s classification.

According to the Internal Revenue Service website, a political organization gathers donations or spends money to influence the election of a candidate to any level of public office.

Orbach said SSDP has not given money to any political candidates or shown public support for any political party or publication.

SA Senator Robert Lausch, who was quoted in the FIRE letter, said he felt SSDP was a political organization based on statements made by SSDP representatives about contact with local candidates during their recognition discussion.

Lausch said he also felt SSDP is a political organization based on several of the group’s Facebook posts.

One of the posts, dated Oct. 14, urged members to lobby local Illinois representatives to vote for a bill that would change the medical marijuana law.

Lausch also said he thought SSDP’s affiliation with NIU Libertarians for a discussion in a Facebook post from Oct. 6 was evidence.

The SSDP national organization offers a lobbying guide on its website, a fact that also convinced Lausch that SSDP is a political organization.

“If that’s not political, I don’t know what political is,” Lausch said.

Orbach said there are chapters of SSDP that are political in nature, but the NIU chapter is not.

Lausch said he finds fault with one of the main statements of the FIRE letter. According to the letter, it was unconstitutional for the SA Senate to deny recognition to NIU SSDP.

But Lausch disagrees that the SA Senate ever denied the group recognition. He said the SA Senate postponed the decision under agreement from both parties to look into reclassification.

NIU SSDP representatives chose not to attend at the next meeting, he said.

“In no way, shape or form is anyone at the senate trying to hold them back from being an organization but do it under the right veil, under what you really are,” Lausch said.

Orbach said as of now they have been seeking to reinstate their temporary recognition so the group can continue to meet on campus.

Orbach said he has heard similar complaints from other organizations about being treated unfairly by the SA.

Lausch said the situation has escalated because NIU SSDP has not followed procedure.

Orbach disagrees.

“The university has chosen to escalate this situation by not listening to [us],” he said.