The law & the institutional rules
Wisconsin Law
What Wisconsin’s hazing statute says, how university discipline
differs from criminal proceedings, and where to read the rules
yourself.
Wis. Stat. § 948.51
Willingness does not settle the question.
Wisconsin defines “forced activity” as an activity that is a
condition of initiation, admission, or affiliation with an
organization,
regardless of a student’s willingness to participate.
The statute prohibits intentionally or recklessly endangering a
student’s physical health or safety for initiation, admission, or
affiliation with an organization operating in connection with a
school, college, or university. Its examples include physical
brutality, forced consumption of substances, forced confinement,
and other forced activity that endangers physical health or
safety.
The archived statute lists a Class A misdemeanor when the act
results in or is likely to result in bodily harm; a Class H felony
when it results in great bodily harm; and a Class G felony when it
results in death. Applying those provisions requires evidence
about the conduct and the relevant legal elements.
Different responsibilities
Two processes. Different questions.
01 · CRIMINAL PROCESS
Does the evidence establish a crime?
Police investigate; prosecutors make charging decisions; courts
decide criminal cases. A police allegation or arrest does not
establish guilt. The archive’s incident release is a police
account, not a court judgment.
Read what police actually said
→
02 · UNIVERSITY PROCESS
Did a student violate university rules?
UWS Chapter 17 describes nonacademic misconduct and disciplinary
procedures. Its policy statement explains that university
responsibility is separate from civil or criminal action. UW’s
September 25 message says it will investigate individual
students.
Read the disciplinary rules
→
Recognition is a separate issue. UW’s termination
of a student organization does not answer whether an individual
student may face discipline. The vice chancellor’s archived message
specifically distinguishes the unrecognized group from individual
students subject to UWS Chapter 17.
Questions that matter
Separate the claim from the rule.
“They agreed to it” means it cannot be hazing.
The statute’s definition of forced activity expressly applies
regardless of willingness to participate. Whether conduct
violates the law still depends on the statutory elements and
evidence.
Wis. Stat. § 948.51(1)–(2) ↗
Does hazing require a serious injury?
The archived statute prohibits the specified intentional or
reckless endangerment. Its misdemeanor provision includes an
act that is likely to result in bodily harm, even if it does
not actually cause great bodily harm. The more serious listed
classifications depend on the result.
Archived statute, subsections (2)–(3) ↗
Is the university’s hazing policy the same as the criminal
statute?
No. UW-2001 includes physical, mental, emotional, and
psychological health and conduct connected to initiating,
affiliating, or maintaining membership in a group. Criminal
law and university policy have different language, processes,
and consequences.
UW–Madison Hazing Policy UW-2001 ↗
Does “unrecognized” mean the university has no role?
UW’s archived response says AEPi’s recognition was terminated
in 2015 and that the Office of Student Conduct and Community
Standards will investigate individual students. UWS 17.08
addresses misconduct on and outside university lands under
specified conditions.
Vice chancellor’s September 25 message ↗
Does an arrest prove the allegations?
No. The archived release reports arrests for hazing and
disorderly conduct. It is not a conviction or judicial
finding, and this archive does not infer a case outcome from
the arrests.
Madison Police incident release ↗
What did the Stop Campus Hazing Act change?
The federal act adds hazing-related reporting, policy, and
prevention requirements for covered institutions. For incident
statistics, its student-organization definition includes
groups whether or not recognized. Its Campus Hazing
Transparency Report provision addresses findings involving
organizations established or recognized by the institution.
These are distinct reporting requirements.
Stop Campus Hazing Act, sections 2–3 ↗
Can every disciplinary or police record be released?
No. Wisconsin public-records procedures provide a route to
request records, but exemptions, student privacy, and other
applicable limits may affect disclosure. Ask for the
releasable portions and a written explanation of any
withholding rather than assuming every record must be public.
UW–Madison public-records information ↗
Primary sources
Read the law yourself.
01 · STATE LAW
Wisconsin hazing statute
The definition of forced activity, prohibited conduct, and
listed penalties.
Read § 948.51 →
02 · STUDENT DISCIPLINE
UWS Chapter 17
Nonacademic misconduct, jurisdiction, procedures, and sanctions.
Read Chapter 17 →
03 · CAMPUS POLICY
UW-2001: Hazing
The university’s definitions, reporting routes, investigation
process, and prevention requirements.
Read UW-2001 →
04 · FEDERAL LAW
Stop Campus Hazing Act
The archived federal act concerning hazing statistics, policy,
prevention, and transparency reports.
Read the act →
05 · UNIVERSITY RECORDS
Public-records access
UW’s process for requesting releasable records.
Find the records process →
06 · THE CASE FILE
Law in context
Compare the laws and policies with the police release,
university statements, and historical records.
Open the case file →