The Gay Liberation Front submitted its constitution to the University Students Activities Office Board and was recognized in winter quarter 1971, but Dr. Thomas Scott, dean of students, vetoed the board’s decision on March 5. The Administrative Council upheld Scott’s ruling on March 5, 1971. The group decided to seek recognition from both the SHA and from the university, and refiled its constitution with the USAOB. It was again denied recognition and again appealed to the Administrative Council. The council turned down the request for recognition a second time on June 2, 1971.
On June 3, 1971, in an effort to provide use of university facilities and potential funding, the student senate incorporated a Gay Liberation group as a board of the student senate. Chancellor Weaver issued a statement that the student senate does not “have authority to disperse funds derived from student activities fees . . . nor does it have the authority to grant permission for use of University facilities to any student or group of students.” President of the student senate Charles Huddleston indicated that the board formed by the student senate was not the same as the Gay Liberation Front, but that it did include the clause about social activities on campus that the GLF organization had. This clause had been administratively determined to violate the Tennessee “crimes against nature” statute.
At the January 17, 1974, board of trustees meeting, a three-person committee of the board (E. S. Bevins Jr., Paul Kinser, and Robert McDowell) was appointed to hear the appeal of the Gay People’s Alliance, a campus organization that included students, faculty, and staff, both gay and nongay. Acting upon the recommendation of the committee, the board voted at its June 20, 1974, meeting to deny recognition. The committee’s findings included that members and officers have had unrestricted opportunity to exchange ideas at UT Knoxville, that the primary purpose for which the group sought recognition was to schedule facilities, that the principal purpose of the contemplated and planned activities was to provide a social environment enabling homosexuals to meet and socialize with other homosexuals, and that having social gatherings of the group on campus would “degrade the high purpose of an institution of higher education and encourage disrespect for and violation of the state law pertaining to crimes against nature and would prove disruptive of the continued proper functioning of the University as an educational institution.”