Tabulation wouldn't have been changed even if I had won the case, and it takes place next Tuesday, I think. If I had won, we might have had results before that. We'll definitely have them afterwards.
Frankly, "I know it when I see it" would've been a more sensible explanation for the decision. As it reads now, it seems like the constitution prohibits "undue delay" but lets the governing apparatus determine how much delay is due at its discretion.
Next up: No one shall be denied due process... but whoever's in charge can determine how much process is really due.
I don't think the decision goes that far. If the Senate passed an unreasonable delay, that would obviously be undue, and the Council, under this decision, would strike it down. It's just up to them to take on a case-by-case basis what is and is not undue. Planned Parenthood v Casey, anyone?
But there isn't any discussion of reasonableness. It just says that the ASUC can determine what is "due delay" through policy decisions. I actually rose the reasonableness issue in my charge sheet, and they didn't feel it necessary to address it. Instead, it seems like they're willing to simply defer to the By-Laws in determining what delay is "due."