Also, to be clear, these insights were obtained as a direct result of your support for our shared cause. They fall into two groups: the first group (Lessons 1-6) are the things we learned about the chapter and our history (including recent history) in the run-up to our initial engagement with the university administration under Persis Drell and filing our lawsuit. The second group (Lessons 7-10) are the lessons learned from engaging with the university seeking to get the chapter re-recognized and our house restored. Lessons 7-10 will be the subject of an expanded separate newsletter at some future point.
LESSON #1
Stanford TDX alumni paid not once, but twice, for building the TDX house at 675 Lomita Drive: (1) in the 1960s, at Stanford’s request, fraternities gave up ownership (i.e., the asset value) of their existing houses which they had paid for at an earlier time and, additionally, (2) fraternity alumni donated the funds needed to build the new houses (while Stanford provided the land and additional funds).All Stanford fraternities, except Sigma Chi (who kept ownership of their house), entered into this deal at the time.
LESSON #2
When these cluster houses were proposed, TDX answered the university’s call for more housing, with the understanding (not contractual) that we would keep the newly constructed Theta Delt house in perpetuity so long as we remained a recognized fraternity. Otherwise, why else would we have given up our house which we owned outright? Stanford Greeks as a whole raised the money necessary for 7 new houses to be built at a cost of tens of millions of dollars at 2024 values.
LESSON #3
TDX has been a model house at Stanford: Immediately prior to being disbanded by the University, the Stanford TDX chapter was one of the most diverse on campus. Stanford TDX 2022 members were 60% non-white and 20% LGBTQ. In short, the chapter represented everything that the administration wants a Stanford fraternity student living organization to be. The house included White, Black, and Brown students, gay students, athletes and scholars, and students from a broad swatch of socioeconomic backgrounds.
LESSON #4
TDX alumni are and have consistently been some of Stanford’s most engaged and generous alumni. In just the last capital campaign, one TDX individual alone gave $50 million and pledged another $100 million; moreover, two Stanford TDX alumni are current Trustees, and one spouse of a TDX alum is a recent former Trustee, in addition to the many TDX and other Greek alums who are or have been Trustees.
LESSON #5
There were important matters of precedent and fairness that were ignored by Stanford’s previous Administration group. In terms of standard practice under established university procedures, a fraternity was never removed from its house without a detailed “get healthy” plan. If fraternities were removed from their houses, they had the expectation that they would be able to return to those houses after time served. Persis Drell and Susie Brubaker-Cole changed this practice.
LESSON #6
The harsh reality that became clear is that even if Stanford’s TDX chapter were to do everything correctly and were to be re-recognized, they would still not be returned to their house absent Stanford’s top leadership’s intervention. It is possible that despite all the included reasons and their long presence in the Stanford community, the Theta Delts might not ever be returned to any house once re-recognized. Instead, they would enter a pool waiting for one or more of the currently housed organizations to fail (yet another rule that Stanford needs to abolish) something that might never happen.
LESSON #7
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there is the material unfairness surrounding the use of the event that brought on this move by the University against TDX: the tragic and accidental death of our fraternity brother, Eitan Weiner. It is well known that when Eitan Weiner suffered an accidental fentanyl poisoning in the TDX house in 2020, his parents, both senior Stanford employees, were quite understandably overwhelmed with grief. Perhaps certain University administrators felt pressured to make an example of the house, else they could get sued by the parents. Eitan’s Parents sued the University anyway after the investigation. In filing its formal answer to the lawsuit, Stanford, however,asserted that no one other than Eitan was responsible for his accidental overdose and death. Despite this claim by the University, the ruling against TDX has never been withdrawn.
We have specifically asked Stanford’s new Provost, Jenny Martinez, to take a hard and informed look into the investigative process that was undertaken against the house, beginning a full 9 months after the events surrounding Etian Weiner’s death, to determine whether the official administrative investigation was an exercise in scapegoating. We have made clear that we believe it was.
LESSON #8
Even after a decision was reached by the team investigating the TDX house’s behavior on Stanford’s behalf, there were significant procedural irregularities. The most egregious of these irregularities was that the investigative team’s and OCB’s recommendation for only a one year suspension of the chapter (with no loss of housing) was wrongfully ignored by the reviewing parties, Deans Mona Hicks and Emelyn dela Peña. Instead, they arbitrarily and without advance notice changed the punishment from the recommended one year probation to a six year “suspension” of the fraternity, effectively a death sentence for the chapter. Susie Brubaker-Cole subsequently reduced the sentence to a still unjust four years (to June 8, 2025).
LESSON #9
In response to the above, members of Stanford TDX’s alumni organized to engage the administration and met with Howard Wolf, Susie Brubaker-Cole, Mona Hicks, and others in an attempt to come to a resolution. It was only after that effort was determined to be futile, as a result of Ms. Brubaker-Cole’s refusal to engage after the first meeting, was it decided that the only way to get the Stanford administration’s full attention was to file a lawsuit against the university. This lawsuit was brought in the California courts in 2023 on behalf of Stanford’s Theta Delt alumni based on Stanford’s failure both to follow its own rules and its failure to provide due process.
LESSON 10
Finally, we have concluded that there is something seriously wrong in the administrative process by which student conduct is reviewed and punished at Stanford and with the people administering that process. Stanford has apparently become a place where the presumption of innocence no longer exists and abusive behavior toward students caught up in these processes is not uncommon, at least in this context. Katie Meyer’s case is probably the best known, but it is not unusual (see here). We have suggested to Stanford’s new leadership that it is time to bring forward new people who have a propensity to engage in straight dealing and who better appreciate civil liberties (especially the presumption of innocence), the right to counsel, and respect for the rights of defendants.
IN CONCLUSION
For all of the above reasons, we have requested that the above adverse decisions involving Stanford’s TDX chapter be rescinded (or at least reduced to time served).
We have also asked that TDX be allowed to return to campus to begin the rush process and to start rebuilding the chapter by Fall Quarter 2024 so that we can fully participate in the 2025 Spring Rush. We have also made clear that if we can engage a sufficient number of students, we believe that the organization should be allowed to return to the house at 675 Lomita Drive that it has occupied for the last sixty years and for which its alumni paid.
We also made clear that this action would serve as a tremendous step forward in repairing the Stanford TDX community’s long standing relationship with the University and help heal this breach which has been allowed to fester and grow. We let them know that it is clear in our experience that TDX alumni love Stanford but feel very roughly and inappropriately handled by the previous set of administrators and that we hope that the University will act on its own to correct this situation because it is the right thing to do.