Front Page

Case 48: Golden v ASUCD Elections Committee to be heard February 10, 2010

The Court will hear arguments for Case 48: Golden v ASUCD Elections Committee at 6:30 pm and will have its regularly scheduled meeting after. No significant business is expected other than the hearing.

Appellee ASUCD Election Committee's brief for Case 48: Golden v ASUCD Elections Committee is due to the Court.

Appellant Golden's brief for Case 48: Golden v ASUCD Elections Committee is due to the Court.

The Court accepted Case 48: Golden v ASUCD Elections Committee and will have a hearing at 6:30pm Wednesday, February 10. Justice Meyerhoff recused himself as the Appellant is his housemate.

The Court has been discussing the merits of the current Request for Deliberation system. Debate has centered around three choices, the status quo, abolishing Requests for Deliberation altogether, or making acceptance of a Request for Deliberation contingent on a full presentation of the issue by a Senate representative. At its February 3rd meeting, the Court deadlocked 3-3-1 on abolition, and voted 2-4-1 against on requiring a Senate presentation. They intend to revisit the issue after new Justices are appointed.

• The Court
  

• Procedure
  

• History

• Term 2009-10
  

• Term 2008-09
  

• Term 2007-08 and Previous

• Missy Whitney

In order of seniority

• Ryan Meyerhoff
  

• Daniel Maroon
  

• David Karimi
  

• Kirstin Miller
  

• Kaitlyn Clark
  

• Emma Seche
  

• 2 vacancies

This list is incomplete. You can help the Court wiki by adding what you know!

• Tim Coady

• Kris Fricke
  

• Rudy Ornelas

• Filipp Ovchinnikov