A federal district judge has dismissed a conservative UB student group’s long-running federal lawsuit that alleged free-speech violations and discrimination by UB officials and the undergraduate Student Association (SA).
In a decision issued late last month, Judge Lawrence Vilardo wrote that UB’s chapter of Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) failed to make a valid legal claim, and that his court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.
“This case boils down to the plaintiffs’ refusal to acknowledge compliance with a policy under which they have operated for several years,” Vilardo wrote of YAF in his 77-page decision. “There is nothing about that policy—or the required compliance—that precludes the plaintiffs from saying what they want, stops them from associating with any person or entity with whom they want to associate, or compels them to say anything they do not wish to say.”
Ruling comes after an 18-month legal battle
Vilardo’s dismissal culminates a lawsuit YAF filed more than a year and a half ago, in June, 2023.
Since then, the group’s grievances shifted several times.
YAF’s initial complaint centered on an SA policy introduced in March 2023, three weeks after YAF hosted right-wing speaker Michael Knowles on campus, drawing hundreds of protesters. That policy, which required clubs to dissolve ties with off-campus organizations, would have required clubs such as UB’s chapter of YAF to end their affiliation with their respective national groups.
While the policy didn’t name YAF or Knowles, then-SA president Becky Paul-Odionhin told SA senators at the time, “We all know why we’re doing this.”
The move resulted in backlash from several clubs with off-campus affiliations, ranging from chapters of political groups to humanitarian and public-service organizations.
On June 1, 2023, YAF sued SA and three UB officials, claiming that SA’s affiliation ban targeted YAF and violated its constitutional rights to free speech and association. YAF’s lawyers asked the court to temporarily block the SA policy from taking effect, and on July 6, 2023, SA leadership repealed the ban before it took effect.
July 2023: YAF amends its lawsuit
With the affiliation ban gone before it took effect, YAF’s lawsuit no longer had a target. But the SA had replaced the ban with a new policy: an “Acknowledgement of Club Officer Responsibilities,” a document requiring club leaders to certify that they agreed to follow SA’s existing policies. Among those rules was one maintaining that “no SA club may be a separate legal entity from SA.”
So YAF amended its complaint, alleging that by requiring YAF to be a component of the student government, SA was requiring it to violate its constitutional right to freedom of association.
Speaking to The Spectrum after a hearing in April 2024, YAF attorney Logan Spena said that by requiring clubs to be a part of SA, the student government forced them to associate with other clubs whose views they disagree with.
“They’re saying, ‘You’ve got no legal existence whatsoever,’ so the only group that exists is the Student Association,” Spena said at the time. “The Student Association is basically conscripting everybody to be in one giant group.”
SA attorney Aaron Saykin disagreed, saying that SA had attempted to address YAF’s concerns.
“The process that’s in place now is compliant with every constitutional requirement,” he told The Spectrum at the time. “It helps ensure that the student funds are properly protected, and administered and spent in a way consistent with the purposes of the student government.”
YAF’s updated lawsuit asked Vilardo to temporarily overturn the SA’s club recognition policy, the same policy under which YAF had operated for years.
Spena said during the April hearing that while the repealed affiliation ban never materially impacted the club, SA had nevertheless initially planned to enforce it, and that if they had done so, it would have impacted the club. He said the threat of that theoretical impact created a “constitutional injury.”
At the time, Vilardo appeared skeptical of that argument, telling Spena, “I’m having a hard time with this ‘constitutional injury’ that seems to be something of your own creation.”
SA welcomes Vilardo’s ruling
After April’s hearing, the case went quiet for eight months while Vilardo formulated a ruling. On Dec. 15, one arrived: Case dismissed.
In a statement to The Spectrum, Saykin, the SA’s attorney, called the decision a “complete loss” for YAF.
“From the beginning, we strongly believed that the claims were meritless,” Saykin wrote in an email. “We were confident that the court would reach the correct conclusion and dismiss the case, and it did.”
Vilardo said that YAF might still have a case in the future, if it could demonstrate actual harm caused by SA.
“Perhaps the plaintiffs are correct that if they comply with the policy and acknowledge compliance, the Student Association will try to stop them from speaking or associating in ways that the Student Association does not approve,” he wrote. “And if that happens, the plaintiffs may well have a viable constitutional challenge. But that is a case for another day.”
YAF appeals decision
Despite Vilardo’s ruling, YAF’s lawyers aren’t giving up the case. This Tuesday, Jan. 14, they submitted an appeal to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, asking the court to reopen the case.
In a telephone interview with The Spectrum, YAF attorney Logan Spena said Vilardo’s decision was “legally inappropriate.”
“The court credited the Student Association’s attempt to rewrite history,” he said, referring to Vilardo’s ruling that the affiliation ban never materially impacted YAF.
“Punishing the group because of their national affiliation was a complete constitutional injury on its own,” Spena said. “And then on top of that, the acknowledgement form — that’s causing [YAF] to have to sign away multiple rights in order to access a forum that must constitutionally be open to them.”
Meanwhile, Saykin says he anticipates the appeals court will again side with the SA.
“We also expected that the plaintiffs would likely appeal their loss, despite their lawsuit’s lack of merit,” he wrote. “We have every confidence that the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will reach the correct conclusion, as well.”
The appeals court has not yet responded to YAF’s filing.
Mylien Lai is the senior news editor and can be reached at mylien.lai@ubspectrum.com.
Sol Hauser is the former senior news editor and can be reached at sol.hauser@ubspectrum.com.
Mylien Lai is the senior news editor at The Spectrum. Outside of getting lost in Buffalo, she enjoys practicing the piano and being a bean plant mom. She can be found at @my_my_my_myliennnn on Instagram.
