4 C.C.

(2013/2014)

ASUO Constitution Court

REVIEW OF OSPIRGS PROPOSED SPRING TERM BALLOT MEASURES AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
[Decided January 30, 2014]

PER CURIAM. I On January 20, 2014, OSPIRG Chapter Chair Hannah Picknell submitted to the Court two proposed ballot measures for the spring 2014 general election. Upon reviewing the ballot measures, the justices concluded they needed more time for deliberation than the seven court days initially allotted. On January 28, 2014, Chief Justice Apana issued Judicial Order 0114 via email to Ms. Picknell, ordering an extension in the Courts deliberation time for one more week on the above two ballot measures. On January 29, 2014, Ms. Picknell sent the Court a third proposed ballot measure and a constitutional amendment for review. II Pursuant to Article 15 5 of the ASUO Constitution, the Constitution Court has jurisdiction to review and approve all proposed ballot measures and constitutional amendments. This provision of the Constitution stipulates that the wording of all proposals to be placed on the ballot must be reviewed and approved by the Constitution Court. The proposed ballot measure must consist of two parts: a brief question and a separate statement. III The three proposed ballot measures and the constitutional amendment are all direct funding measures. These four measures implicate U.S. federal

4 C.C. (2013/2014)
law, specifically the case Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth, 529 U.S. 217 (2000). After extensive deliberation and given that the Courts ruling on these four matters depends on federal law, the Court unanimously has decided not to hear these four measures for two reasons. First, these four matters implicate law that is outside of the ASUO Constitution Courts jurisdiction. Provision 11 2 of the ASUO Constitution states, 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. Since these four matters implicate federal law and highlight arguments from the U.S. Supreme Court that have not yet been fully established, these matters are outside of the ASUO Constitution Courts purview, and thus, the Court will not be deciding upon these matters. Second, the Court wants to establish consistency within its rulings and understanding among the student body regarding the matters the Court will rule upon. The Court will hear matters that implicate the ASUO Constitution and any rules and resolutions promulgated under it. Additionally, the Court will review proposed ballot measures, constitutional amendments, and the like. Matters that implicate state and federal law are outside of the Courts purview, and thus, this Court will not hear such matters. Given that the proposed OSPIRG ballot measures and constitutional amendment implicate U.S. federal law, the Court hereby formally refers these four measures to the University Administration and those who rule upon legal matters regarding the University. This ruling shall neither limit nor prejudice the Court in any future proceeding in which these measures are contested in a case or controversy brought before the Court.

It is so ordered.