How do you know it has to be 3 justices? Title 2 Section 3.5 of the bylaws makes it unclear. First it says the Senate revokes sponsorship, then it says the Judicial Council.
 

I know because I'm a wizard. Also, because 3 is a majority of 4.

3.5 is weirdly worded, though I know (because I was involved in writing it) that it was changed specifically to take away the authority of the Senate to revoke sponsorship for violations of rules and put it in the hands of the Judicial Council. I don't think the presence of the By-Laws even matters, since judicial remedies for violations of the rules is the Judicial Council's job under the Constitution.
 

"I don't think the presence of the By-Laws even matters, since judicial remedies for violations of the rules is the Judicial Council's job under the Constitution."

Wait...did you just say the Council has Constitutional authority to toss the recall for violating the rules?
 

I already said the Judicial Council has the Constitutional authority to do whatever it wants to. But the old system of having the Senate determine if student groups violated the rules in order to revoke their funding was a clear encroachment on Judicial Council authority. The reasons for which a student group can have its funding revoked, and the consequence of funding revocation, however, both exist in the By-Laws. The recall case involves a call for the Judicial Council to invent violations and/or punishments, not merely perform its function: "To review charges of violation of this Constitution, the By-Laws of the Association, and all other regulations of the Association."