Tuesday, May 03, 2005
You lose!
The Daily Cal says, of Zach Liberman's two campaign violation thingies:
Since the council ruled in Liberman's favor on the first charge, Liberman, who has already been censured twice, no longer runs the risk of being disqualified from the election. Candidates are disqualified after receiving five censures.
Good reporting!
In other news, Zach Liberman has been disqualified, as he received two censures for each of the two remaining violations. Also, in the second decision, we see how gracefully the senate wrote the by-laws:
Furthermore, while considering the five-censure threshold, the Judicial Council noticed a contradictory and unconstitutional law in 4.13. According to 4.13.3.5, "receiving five (5) or more censures from the Judicial Council for the same ASUC election" is an elections violation, which warrants two to three censures per 4.13.10.4. If followed, it would result in an infinitely recursive sanction against Mr. Liberman, who has just hit the five-censure threshold, resulting in an infinite number of censures. Obviously, this makes no sense from a logical standpoint. Also, the Constitution, Article XI, Section 1 guarantees due process and equal protection of the law. We believe that 4.13.3.5, in effect, punishes a candidate for being punished, which is a blatant violation of due process. Therefore, the Judicial Council hereby orders 4.13.3.5 to be unconstitutional and stricken from the By-Laws.
(as a sidenote, I actually disagree with the decision to assign two censures for each offense, but I don't really care. I also agree with Liberman's complaint about Royer only filing clean-up violation charges against him, but that case has been dismissed, so it doesn't really matter. Not that that'll stop Liberman, necessarily.)
. . .
|
. . .
|
