. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nap Time!!!

Monday, February 23, 2009

Attorney General Michael Sinanian attempts a turn-around jumper and will, in fact, file charges based on these endorsement-like things. The charge sheet itself merely accuses IAC and JSU (but not BCR) of taking postive or negative action on the recall election without an in-depth discussion of why.
Both the IAC and the JSU have circulated e-mails using their mailing lists, which clearly demonstrate an action being taken on their part on the recall election. These actions may be viewed as either positive or negative depending on the standpoint of the observer, but it is an 'action' nonetheless and liable for being pursued as a violation according to the above-cited sections from the By-Laws.
Note that this is not being filed as a campaign violation, and thus the opponents of the proposition are not on the hook. Instead, it is charging the student groups directly for violating the requirements for ASUC-sponsored organizations, which means the only remedy is a loss of sponsorship. I would expect the Judicial Council to either find a way to conclude that this is not a violation, or determine that revoking sponsorship is too extreme (perhaps because this is the first recall election in ever, so no one understood the rules), but who knows.

In discussions about the suit, he took the position that any use of an organization's mailing list by any member would be a violation, which I doubt would hold up in general. An open mailing list where any member could send an e-mail to the list taking any position would almost certainly not be a violation, since the ASUC itself allows folks on either side of the proposition to use its resources to communicate a position on the election (e.g the Voter Guide, guest announcements in the Senate, etc.). In the particular cases, the JSU apparently issued a resolution, which is close to an endorsement, while the IAC e-mail could be read as an endorsement as well. I don't know the IAC's mailing list practices, so I whether it's a leader using her position as leader to take a side or simply a leader acting as a member and sending an e-mail will probably make a difference. (This is why I suspect that Tommy Owens' e-mail to the BCR list could not be marked as a violation by BCR)

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 2/23/2009 09:28:00 AM #
Comments (0)
. . .
Comments: Post a Comment

. . .