The ASUC Judicial Council has voted to accept a petition filed against ASUC President Connor Landgraf for his use of an executive order to place the health and wellness referendum on the ballot in the recent ASUC election.
The Judicial Council also announced it will not hold a hearing because of the timing and nature of this case but will instead issue a summary judgment.
“I’m not surprised that the Judicial Council accepted the petition, since they also accepted the original petition filed a couple of weeks ago,” said ASUC Attorney General Hinh Tran. “It’s unfortunate that the council will not allow both sides to vigorously debate, but I respect its decision.”
ASUC President Connor Landgraf is optimistic that the council will uphold his executive order despite the absence of a hearing.
“In the past, it seems like those who have accused me of violating the constitution have been poorly organized during these debates,” Landgraf said. “So it’s not a big deal that the council decided not to hold any hearings.”
Devonte Jackson, campus organizing director for the Office of the External Affairs Vice President, filed the petition against Landgraf on Wednesday, claiming that Landgraf missed a constitutionally mandated deadline for issuing the executive order that placed the referendum on the ballot.
People who have challenged Landgraf’s use of the executive order welcomed the decision.
“I thought that this was the best possible outcome, because I believe the council is interested in questioning the constitutional legitimacy of Landgraf’s executive order,” said Cooperative Movement Senator Jorge Pacheco, who filed a similar petition against Landgraf in the past. “Regardless of who wins the case, I’m happy that the council is respecting and embracing the judicial process.”
The possibility of a settlement remains open if both parties reach an agreement by Tuesday at 5 p.m.
Contact Shirin Ghaffary and Jason Liu at [email protected].