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.

Read the source. This page explains the archived law and policy documents in general terms. It does not determine anyone’s liability or replace advice about an individual situation. Official sources control if the law changes.

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.

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.

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 ↗

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
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