Monday, February 23, 2009
D-Fence
On these cases, JSU may have a defense, despite how much it looks like "officially taking a position." A careful read of the resolution shows that it could be read as being opposed to the concept of the recall election in general rather than an appeal to vote no on it. The hefty discussion on fees supports this. Given that it was written after the election was already scheduled (and the money will be spent anyway), this may be a weak claim, but it's probably supportable. I don't know if there was a meeting or something which could shed more light on it.
The IAC e-mail is harder to defend based on its content. The use of "we" in the subject line makes it sound unambiguously like a plea from the IAC leadership to its members to vote no on the recall. I imagine the defense will have to be more technical and about how the mailing list is controlled. If anyone can use it, I suppose one could argue that Solin's appeal was independent of any official IAC capacity.
. . .
|
. . .
|
