Miami University Associated Student Government v. Shriver

Decision Date31 May 1984
Docket NumberNo. 82-3492,82-3492
Citation735 F.2d 201
Parties17 Ed. Law Rep. 1047 MIAMI UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATED STUDENT GOVERNMENT, Anthony M. Brant, Michelle E. Huffer, Richard H. Korengold, Gregory E. Lweandowski, Jeffry E. Schalk, Thomas F. Smock, Steven P. Subar, and Barrie Sutton, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Dr. Phillip R. SHRIVER, William G. Liggett, Wayne J. Albers, Donald C. Fanta, John C. Jurgensen, Barry J. Levey, Kent B. McGough, Charles S. Mechem, Jr., Ara Parseghian, and John Weld Peck, Members of the Board of Trustees University, Defendants-Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

James S. Irwin, James E. Michael (argued), Hamilton, Ohio, for defendants-appellees.

Bruce A. Campbell (argued), Columbus, Ohio, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Before MARTIN, CONTIE and WELLFORD, Circuit Judges.

BOYCE F. MARTIN, Jr., Circuit Judge.

The issue in this case is whether Miami University has the authority to prevent its students from operating private automobiles in and around its Oxford, Ohio campus.

Since 1919, Miami University has had a "no-car" policy for undergraduate students enrolled at its Oxford, Ohio campus. Unless a student fits into one of several exceptions, he or she may not operate an automobile in the Oxford area. The Board of Trustees defines the "Oxford area" to include both the university campus itself and the City of Oxford which surrounds the campus. The purpose of the rule, according to the University's president, is to ensure "a sense of community, a sense of involvement, a sense of participation in campus organizations, in campus dialogues ... rather than an exodus away from the campus, away from that learning environment taking place nightly, every weekend, as we have seen in so many places." The rule is enforced by campus security personnel and about twenty "student security aides" who issue violation tickets both on and off campus. Repeated violations of the "no-car" rule can lead to suspension. Approximately 1,800 of the 15,000 students at the Oxford campus are currently allowed to have cars because they come within one of the exceptions to the rule--handicapped students, married students, students over twenty-three, commuting students, and the like.

In 1981, the Miami University Associated Student Government filed suit in federal court under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 to enjoin enforcement of the rule. The association challenged the rule on two grounds: (1) it claimed that the rule violated its members' associational, travel and privacy rights as guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution and (2) it claimed that the Board of Trustees lacked authority under state law to promulgate and enforce rules of conduct unrelated to academic performance off the Miami campus. After a short trial, the district judge found for the defendants and dismissed the case. In his opinion, the trial judge discussed at length the association's constitutional arguments but did not address the state law issues raised by the student government association.

It is a well-established principle that the federal courts should not decide a constitutional question if there is some other ground upon which to dispose of the case. See, e.g., Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 546 n. 12, 94 S.Ct. 1372, 1384 n. 12, 39 L.Ed.2d 577 (1974); Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288, 347, 56 S.Ct. 466, 483, 80 L.Ed. 688 (1936) (Brandeis, J., concurring). The Supreme Court recently reaffirmed this principle in Escambia County v. McMillan, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 1577, 80 L.Ed.2d 36 (1984). In this voting rights case the federal court of appeals had determined that a county's at-large voting system diluted black voting strength in violation of the fourteenth amendment. In order to avoid a potentially unnecessary decision on the constitutional question, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the court of appeals to determine whether the at-large system violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

In our case, the plaintiffs make a strong argument that Ohio law does not grant the Miami Board of Trustees authority to establish and enforce rules of conduct for students off-campus. The statute which grants the Trustees their police authority, Ohio Rev.Code Sec. 3345.21, reads as follows:

Authority to maintain law and order on campus.

The board of trustees of any college or university which receives any state funds in support thereof, shall regulate the use of the grounds, buildings, equipment, and facilities of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Skatemore, Inc. v. Whitmer
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 19 Julio 2022
    ... ... law to the newly created federal government. See id. at 1495. One right surrendered to ... of his statutory authority." See also Miami Univ. Associated Student Gov't v. Shriver , 735 ... ...
  • Torres v. Precision Indus., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 6 Septiembre 2019
    ... ... from the institution of a Federal Government." The Federalist No. 33, at 207 (Alexander ... 2612, 73 L.Ed.2d 245 (1982) (per curiam); Miami Univ. Associated Student Gov't v. Shriver , 735 ... ...
  • PHARMACEUTICAL & DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES v. U. OF UTAH
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Utah
    • 26 Junio 1990
    ... ... The UNIVERSITY OF UTAH, a body politic and corporate, et al., ... in some way relate to and affect the government of the university are considered and construed ...         PDS's reliance on Miami Univ. Assoc. Student v't v. Shriver ... ...
  • Skatemore, Inc. v. Whitmer, 1:21-cv-66
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan
    • 2 Septiembre 2021
    ... ... “takings” by the government for which Plaintiffs ... are entitled to ... Miami Univ. Associated Student Gov't v. Shriver, ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT