NISG Supreme Court Article

NISG Supreme Court mitigates confusion between student organizations
LINDSEY COOK/Staff Writer
Published: Thursday, November 13, 2008
The Northern Iowa Student Government Executive Branch has been both a plaintiff and a defendant in cases the NISG Supreme Court has reviewed this year.
Last year, there wasn’t even a recorded meeting of the Northern Iowan Student Government Supreme Court. This year’s court has heard three complaints with two going to trial, according to Andrew Clopton, NISG Chief Justice.

“The Supreme Court, to my knowledge, has not been real active since the ‘80s,” he said.

The Supreme Court resolves disputes within the NISG or any recognized student organizations.

The latest case the court heard was (Adam) Haselhuhn v. (Pernell) Cezar on Oct. 28, with the decision rendered on Nov. 2.

In the case, Haselhuhn, a university at-large senator, brought a complaint against the executive branch for not fulfilling their responsibilities. Haselhuhn brought it to the court because he was concerned that NISG was operating without an election commission at such a late date in the semester. The Election Commission makes sure that elections are done fairly and that no rules are broken.

“NISG has an Election Commission to oversee all elections that take place,” Haselhuhn said. “At the time the case was filed, the Senate was about to have its ninth meeting of the semester. So NISG was functioning without an Election Commission.”

Clopton said the decision of the court was that they agreed that the election commission should have been formed.

“I’m glad we do have an active judicial branch to keep the other two branches in check. In years past, we have had judicial branches that have never been called into action, but it is nice to see that they are extremely prepared when called upon,” Hasulhuhn said.

“The Court recommended that Brandon Neil, the Election Commissioner, resign from his duties and appoint and Interim Commissioner to take over,” he continued. “Finally, the court urged the Senate to revise the Election Rules and make changes to provide more clarity.”

Clopton said these cases have come up this year because there is a lot of confusion over what bylaws in the constitution mean.

This same problem came up with the other case that was heard Cezar v. Organization and Finance Committee, et. al. Clopton said that in this case, the executive branch thought that NISG operations were subject to the same funding restrictions in the constitution as other groups are.

Ultimately, the court decided that NISG doesn’t fall under the same restrictions for funding for events like the “Panther Bash” and therefore can use more funding than other organizations.

Cezar realizes that his name on the top of both these cases it can be misleading. What it means is that the case dealt with the entire executive branch, and not just Cezar. He believes the new members on the NISG Supreme Court have had an influence on the activity of the branch.

“When we contacted Supreme Court justices from the year before, we ended up having to fill every position,” said Cezar. “Those new people wanted to be more proactive in answering any questions people might have over jurisdiction. It is a great check and balance point for anything in student government really.”

Cezar said there are no limitations to who can submit a complaint to the Supreme Court, as along as the plaintiff has the proper paperwork submitted.

Clopton said this year they are hoping to go beyond their normal duties and do more for students.

“The Supreme Court is looking to establish a way for students to more readily access legal services and council,” he said. “I’m trying to find a list of area attorneys that students could go for legal assistance.”