Unsatisfied with the outcome of their extensive appeals within Iowa State’s judicial process and holding little hope for a successful appeal before the Board of Regents, Cuffs is preparing to take its battle to the courtroom.

The Board of Regents is scheduled to hear the ISU organization’s appeal at its meeting Thursday in the Sun Room of the Memorial Union. There is doubt, however, that the regents will even hear the appeal. Some support a memorandum submitted to board members by the board’s executive director and its Legal Affairs and Human Resources Department calling for the regents to deny the group’s request for an appeal.

Board of Regents staff could not comment on the recommendation or the group’s case, stating that it is board policy not to comment on student appeals and litigation for reasons of protecting individuals’ rights to have their educational records kept confidential, as required under federal law.

Some regents have openly expressed their support for the university’s decision to prohibit the kinds of demonstrations that were determined to be in violation of Student Disciplinary Regulations and Iowa law.

Cuffs, a campus organization with the goal of teaching safe sadism and masochism, was investigated by the Office of Judicial Affairs after a Nov. 10, 2003, meeting during which group president Duane Long flogged a clothed volunteer to demonstrate how to properly and safely perform BDSM.

Director of Judicial Affairs Bethany Schuttinga found Cuffs responsible for assault violations and imposed a sanction on group demonstrations. Group members appealed to Dean of Students Pete Englin, who upheld the original decision and further appealed to ISU President Gregory Geoffroy, who declined to review the case.

The individual Long allegedly assaulted signed written testimony stating she volunteered and was thus not assaulted. Long also said that is was not his intent to cause pain.

The group’s recognition as a student organization that receives student fee money from the Government of the Student Body has spurred alumni, donors and individuals on campus to voice frustrations with the university allowing for such a presence on campus. Geoffroy said concerns from alumni and donors did not factor into his decision.

Geoffroy said he does believe publicity from the group’s activities gives the university a negative image.

“I think it portrays an image that many, many alumni and people in the general public find offensive,” he said. “I find it personally offensive. It goes against my own moral values and beliefs.”

Geoffroy said his beliefs did not factor into his decision and does not challenge the group’s right to be a student organization.

“They are a student group, and they’ve been registered according to the university’s procedure for registering student clubs and organizations,” Geoffroy said. “GSB is the organization that allocates student funds and … it’s a decision they need to make, and I respect their decision-making process. I don’t want to second-guess GSB on that. I will support GSB in its decisions.”

He said it is Cuffs’ prerogative and right to take this to Iowa court, but said he does not agree with the group’s potential move.

“They have been blowing this out of proportion,” Geoffroy said.

Long said he disagrees.

“Such comments denigrate the history of discrimination against alternative sexualities and try to ground us as nothing more than a group of college students who want to do a demonstration,” he said. “This is part of a much broader history and, in that context, this cannot be taken too far.”

Bob Downer, regent from Iowa City, said he agrees with Geoffroy’s determination and will vote to not have the appeal heard at Thursday’s meeting.

“It was not an educational demonstration. It was an inappropriate demonstration. It violates policy, and I support the recommendation,” Downer said.

According to board records, the regents have seldom overturned a university’s judicial decision during the past few years. For this reason, Long said, he and the group have been seeking information on how to conduct such a legal undertaking.

“We still stand behind the belief that if they come to a reasonable understanding of what occurred, they’ll determine that the university’s reasoning is groundless. We are still hopeful, but … it doesn’t seem wise for us to wait for the Board of Regents to make a decision and postpone preparations,” Long said.

He said he believes Cuffs will be able to be more successful using the court system rather than the university’s judicial process, accusing administrators of making decisions reflecting their personal, negative feelings toward BDSM.

“It seems clear from looking back that the university was not interested in a clear understanding of BDSM. It’s my hope that the Board of Regents will not continue that trend,” Long said. “The court system, I think, is a more realistic hope that the pertinent facts will be taken seriously.”

The court system could prove more difficult than Long expects, as the group would have to battle an Iowa Court of Appeals ruling, setting case precedent. The case — State of Iowa v. Edward Collier, which the university used in rendering its decision — ruled that BDSM activities aren’t exempt from Iowa’s assault statute.

Despite this, Long said he believes the group has a convincing argument that the university wrongly applied the law in Cuffs’ situation.

“Right now, we’ve been primarily concerned with how to pick a good lawyer and how we can finance their services,” he said. “A specific amount is hard to generate at this point, but even if it reached some of our most expensive estimates, with the nationwide support we’ve been getting, I believe we could meet the cost.”