ASUO CONSTITUTION COURT PETITION FOR REVIEW FORM

Name: Sam Dotters-Katz Student ID: Date Filed: April 5, 2014 Phone: E-mail: asuopres@uoregon.edu Address:

YOUR BRIEF SHOULD INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION (pursuant to Constitution Court rule 5.2) Name of person(s) against whom this complaint is filed The question presented for review The specific constitutional provision, rule, policy, or resolution relevant to the controversy. Please cite not only the section, but the language of the provision, rule, policy, or resolution verbatim. A brief statement of facts giving rise to the complaint. Please be specific and complete, but concise. The remedy requested--what you want the Constitution Court to do. Any exigent circumstances that require the Constitution Court to hear this complaint with dispatch You may also attach any relevant documents, materials, or other evidence you feel may aid the Court in its deliberations. Place 5 copies of these materials (the attached forms and your petition) in the Constitution Court box in the EMU and deliver one additional copy to each of the person(s) against whom this complaint has been filed. Samuel Dotters-Katz signature of petitioner

Sam Dotters-Katz name

April 5, 2014 date

print

PROOF OF SERVICE FORM PETITIONER I, the undersigned, certify that I have served the opposing party (or parties) with this petition. They received this petition by (choose one): ____ mail; ____ in person; X other (please specify): N/A

I realize that in order for the Constitution Court to hear my case or controversy, this procedure must be followed.

Samuel Dotters-Katz signature Sam Dotters-Katz print name April 5, 2014 date

CERTIFICATION OF CONFORMITY I certify that I have read the Rules and Procedures of the ASUO Constitution Court and that this Petition for Review complies with the requirements of the Rules. Samuel Dotters-Katz signature Sam Dotters-Katz print name April 5, 2014 date

1. 2.

Name of person against whom complaint is filed: N/A. Motion for clarification Questions presented for review: 1. What is the proper procedure when two portions of the ASUO Constitution conflict in their mandate to student leaders? 2. What are appropriate steps for the student government to take considering the circumstances of the 2014 ASUO Elections. Specific constitutional provisions and rules:

3.

ASUO Constitution 11.2: The Constitution Court shall have supreme and final authority on all questions of interpretation of this Constitution and any rules promulgated under it, including elections rules and complaints. ASUO Constitution 13.1: The ASUO Elections shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the best interests of the student body. The elections shall be conducted in a fair, orderly, and impartial manner, and the educational atmosphere of the University shall not be compromised, by any member of the ASUO involved in the electoral process. ASUO Constitution 13.2: The regular ASUO Election shall be held no earlier than February 1st, and no later than April 30th of each year.

ASUO Constitution 6.20: The ASUO President or the Elections Board Chair as the case may be, shall submit appointments requiring Student Senate confirmation to the Student Senate. The Student Senate shall confirm or deny appointments within no more than 15 school days of receipt of the applications from the ASUO President, except as provided in section 5.4. The appointments requiring senate approval are members of the ASUO Constitution Court, ASUO Elections board, Programs Finance Committee, Athletics and Contracts Finance Committee, Department Finance Committee, all elected student members of the EMU Board and the Student Senate, and executive appointments. ASUO Constitution 13.5: The ASUO President shall appoint an Elections Board Chair by November 1st each year. The Elections Board Chair shall appoint four members to the Elections Board by January 15 each year. The Chair and Board are subject to confirmation by a majority of the Student Senate. The Elections Board shall be responsible for promulgation of election rules and procedures by week 5 of Winter term, and for the overall direction of the elections. The Elections Board shall interpret the Election Rules on request and shall have the authority to hear complaints of violations. The Elections Board shall rule within forty-eight (48) hours of having received such complaint or request for interpretation. The Elections Board shall have the authority to act as hearings officers and form a Hearings Committee that must include but is not limited to three Elections Board members. All rule interpretations and Hearings Committee decisions may be appealed to the Constitution Court. All Elections Board members shall be required to be neutral in all ASUO Elections that occur during their time on the Board. ASUO Constitution 13.5: The Elections Board shall be responsible for promulgation of election rules and procedures by week 5 of Winter term, and for the overall direction of the elections. ASUO Constitution 11.9: Any member or administrative body of the Association may refer any question regarding correct construction or interpretation of any part of this Constitution or any rule promulgated under it to the ASUO Constitution Court. Members of the Court may not make such requests. Clark Document Section C, second paragraph:

The ASUO shall be responsible for conducting its own elections in accordance with the ASUO Constitution, and the results of such elections shall be considered as an official expression of student opinion. Clark Document Section B, first paragraph: The University of Oregon acknowledges the right of recognized student government, in exercise of its delegated power and through its constitution, to elect a body to make incidental fee recommendations to the OSBHE.

Statement of facts: A. On March 20, 2014, the Elections Board issued a unanimous ruling disqualifying Ben Bowman from the ballot for, among other things, intimidation with intent of affecting the outcome of the election B. On March 30, 2014, the Constitution Court upheld the Elections Board ruling disqualifying Ben Bowman, in 9 C.C. (2013/2014). The two Jusitces dissenting thought a more appropriate sanction would be a prohibition on him campaigning, and of the slate promoting him, all throughout the election, prohibition from participating in the debates, and require listing his violations in the voter guide and on the ballot C. On April 4, 2014, Dr. Robin Holmes sent an email declaring elections are postponed for a week and that Ben Bowman will be on the ballot D. Later, on April 4, 2014, the entire Elections Board resigned, including the Coordinator.

1.

Requested remedies: (1) I am requesting that the Constitution Court declare that administration had no authority to overrule the Constitution Court on the matter of Tullis v. Bowman; (2) I am requesting the Constitution Court guide the ASUO, as two sections of the ASUO Constitution requiring that the ASUO elections be held by April 30, and requiring that the ASUO elections be overseen by an elections board nominated and appointed by a specific and lengthy process clearly conflicting given the circumstances.

are

On the second remedy requested, I am particularly requesting that the Constitution Court give its views on the potential for the immediate nomination by the ASUO President and confirmation by the ASUO Senate of a new elections officer or officers to run such elections as result from the ongoing discussions between the ASUO and the Administration.

2.

Exigent circumstances: Elections are supposed to start in nine days from now. The sooner this is clarified, the smoother everything will be for all parties involved