The ASUCR Senate co-signed below does not accept nor acknowledge the Judicial Council’s recent Majority Opinion - W17-JR-05 due to its encroachment of the powers of the Legislative and Executive branches, its failure to follow the due process of the Judicial Rules of Procedures, and the undermining of the systems of separations of powers and checks and balances between the three branches.

1.

2. 3.

4.

5.

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES IN QUESTION Can the Judicial Council legislate to require that candidates’ campaign materials not be in common with any other candidate and eliminate the use of political parties altogether in the 2017 ASUCR Elections given that the ASUCR Senate has already legislated through Chapter VII, Elections Code to allow political parties and related regulations thereof? Can the Judicial Council revise the elections timetable without the vote of the ASUCR Senate? Did the Judicial Council fail to uphold the due process requirements that the Elections Violations Form be submitted to and forward by the Elections Director along with her amicus curiae briefs as required by the Elections Code and Judicial Rules of Procedure? Did the Judicial Council violate the right of the Executive Powers of the Elections Committee and the Elections Director to decide solutions for matters not considered in the Elections Code for the proper enforcement of the Elections Code? Did the Judicial Council fail to uphold the due process rights of the would-be respondent, including a notice of at least 3 business days, giving which statutes/provisions they are being accused of violating, and the opportunity to make their defense and present evidence? STATEMENT OF FACTS

On 3/6/2017 after the deadline for filing for candidacy in the 2017 ASUCR Elections, a prospective candidate filed a case with the Judicial Council, asking for an extension to the filing deadline. On 3/8/2017 the Judicial Council held its hearing to decide whether or not to accept the hearing. The Council decided to accept it. The Council did not summon and notify the would-be respondent nor the election director. As follows, the would-be respondent did not receive at least 3 business days’ notice. Moreover, no arraignment was held and the Chief Justice or designee did not give which statutes/provisions the would-be respondent was being accused of violating. On the same day, 3/8/2017, the Judicial Council reviewed the alleged evidence presented only by the petitioner and decided to extend the filing deadline, to disband the would-be respondent’s party, and ban the use of political parties altogether in the 2017 ASUCR Elections and requiring campaign materials not be in common with any other candidate.

The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

1

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

Breach of Legislative Powers: The Judicial Council’s recent Majority Opinion - W17-JR-05 will not be accepted nor acknowledged to by the executive nor the legislative branches of ASUCR due to its encroachment of the powers of another branch, specifically Article V, Section I. Powers of the Legislative Branch to "(g) establish rules governing nominations, campaigns and elections for the elected offices of the ASUCR." Moreover, "[t]he Elections Director shall prepare and present a timetable for a general election to the Senate by the end of the first academic quarter of each year, for approval. Any revisions of the timetable shall be made by Senate vote only" according to Chapter VII, Elections Code Part 5, Item 3: Section A. Therefore, if the Judicial Council believes that it is in the best interest of the student body to modify its existing rules governing nominations, campaigns, and elections or extend the elections timeline, it may make its recommendations to the ASUCR Senate and go through the proper legislative process.

Breach of Executive Powers: Moreover, there could not have been a legitimate judicial ruling on this issue because this Judicial Council’s process unconstitutionally disregarded the powers of the executive branch, specifically bypassing the elections director role of the due process; according to Part 4, Item 7, Section B of the elections code, “the individual(s) who witnessed the violation must immediately submit a Campaign Violation Report Form to the Elections Director.” “Upon receipt of the Campaign Violation Report Form, the Elections Director will forward the form and an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief explaining the Elections Director’s opinion of the legitimacy of the claimed violation to the Judicial Branch.” The role of the election director was completely bypassed because

this form was never filed to the elections director. Violations of Judicial Rules of Procedure Due Process: Moreover, to appeal a Judicial Decision on this case would wrongly imply that the Judicial process on this issue has validity, but on the contrary, the Judicial Council failed to follow its own Judicial Rules of Procedure, most importantly the following: 1. The Judicial Council will promptly notify the Petitioner and Respondent by issuing a Summons, as outlined below. It will also notify the Elections Director that the Complaint has been accepted. d. Arraignment i. The Judicial Council shall issue a Summons to the Petitioner and Respondent to appear at the date and time of the arraignment. This summons shall be with at least three (3) business days’ notice. ii. On the date of the arraignment, the Chief Justice or designee shall read to the Court which statutes the Respondent is accused of violating.

The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

2

Not only did the Judicial Council fail to issue a summons to the respondent or notify the elections director, it also failed to arraign the respondent with at least a 3 days notice and failed to read and outline which statues the respondent is accused of violating. This is a complete breach of Judicial Council's own due process outlined in its Judicial Rules of Procedure.

Legal Analysis: 1. The Judicial Council may give strikes for elections violations per the rules legislated by the ASUCR Senate in the Elections Code. However, the Judicial Council violates the Separation and Balance of Powers, Powers of the Legislative Branch, and Elections Rules and Operations provisions of the ASUCR Constitution in its efforts of to amend and legislate new elections rules such as to require that candidates’ campaign materials not be in common with any other candidate and eliminate the use of political parties altogether.

Constitution: Article II: Distribution of Powers SECTION B. Separation and Balance of Powers: No individual or group of individuals within any of the branches may exercise powers delegated to or authority vested in any of the other branches, except as expressly stated in the Constitution herein.

ARTICLE VI: Judicial Branch SECTION E. Powers of the Judicial Branch 1. The Judiciary Branch shall have the expressed explicit authority to: (a) Review conflict of interest cases within the ASUCR; (b) Review financial allocations as needed to ensure they are made in accordance with the provisions set forth in the governing rules of the Finance Committee. This shall not be meant to construe any jurisdictional authority over the actual substance of allocations, only that the Judicial Council must uphold the guidelines that the Finance Committee sets forth; (c) Verify the legality of all approved legislation and any extraneous cases which are brought before the Judicial Council as needed; (d) Review old legislation as needed to maintain the highest interest of the students and to assure that new legislation abides by the regulations set forth by the ASUCR Constitution and By Laws; (e) Regulate and review all elections violations during the yearly elections;

·[[Analysis: Judicial Council is expressly stated to have the power to regulate and give strikes for violations of provisions of the Election Code (as opposed to the power to legislate and regulate elections rules and procedures). Thus, in this case, they do not have the authority to legislate The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

3

new rules of fairness and conduct for the election, nor legislate to outlaw the parties all together in the elections because elections procedures, rules, and timeline are the power of the senate as stated below.]] (f) Review any cases of a request for censure and/or removal of a member of ASUCR as outlined in the ASUCR Constitution and Bylaws.

Article II: Distribution of Powers SECTION B. Separation and Balance of Powers: No individual or group of individuals within any of the branches may exercise powers delegated to or authority vested in any of the other branches, except as expressly stated in the Constitution herein.

ARTICLE V: SECTION I. Powers of the Legislative Branch 1. The Senate Shall: (g) establish rules governing nominations, campaigns and elections for the elected offices of the ASUCR;

·[[Analysis: Judicial Council can NOT legislate to eliminate parties altogether NOR extend the timeline in the elections because elections pertaining to the “rules governing nominations, campaigns and elections” are the power of the senate as stated above. Judicial Council can make these recommendations to the senate but they cannot infringe on senate’s express power to legislate. Here, the Judicial Council cannot ban the use of political parties altogether in the 2017 ASUCR Elections nor legislate that campaign materials not be in common with any other candidate given that the ASUCR senate has already legislated on these matters in the ASUCR Elections Code. ]] ARTICLE VII: Elections SECTION A. Elections Rules and Operations The procedure for the conduct of nominations, campaigns, and elections shall be determined by the Senate. Elections operations shall be executed by the Elections Committee.

-[[Analysis: Given that the procedure for nominations, campaigns, and elections shall be determined by the Senate, the elections committee is under constitutional obligation to execute the procedure set by the senate. Here, the Judicial Council cannot ban the use of political parties altogether in the 2017 ASUCR Elections.]] __________________________________________________________________ 2. The Judicial Council violated the right solely entrusted to the ASUCR Senate to make any revisions to the timetable of the ASUCR Elections.

The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

4

ASUCR Bylaws: CHAPTER VII Elections Code Part 5, Item 3: General Election Timeline and Public Notification Section A. 1. The Elections Director shall prepare and present a timetable for a general election to the Senate by the end of the first academic quarter of each year, for approval. Any revisions of the timetable shall be made by Senate vote only.

-[[Analysis: The Judicial Council does not have the authority to extend or modify the elections timeline without the Senate vote. Here, they may only recommend an extension of the elections timeline but purports to have authority to do so.]] __________________________________________________________________ 3. The Judicial Council violated the right of the Executive Powers of the Elections Committee and the Elections Director to decide solutions for matters not specifically considered in the Elections Code for the proper enforcement of the Elections Code.

Chapter VII Elections Code Part 4, Item 1, Section A, 3. This right, in addition of the right of the Elections Director to use their discretion in suggesting solutions for matters that are not included herein to the Elections Committee, shall be construed to mean that the Elections Director in conjunction with the Elections Committee have the ultimate authority in deciding the proper enforcement of the Elections Code through a simple majority vote.

-[[Analysis: Given that NO statutes of the Elections code has been cited in the charges against the Respondent per JRP 5 Elections Violations, d, ii, the Judicial Council must follow and thus violated here the procedures outlined in Part 4, Item 1, Section A, 3 for any unusual circumstances or matters not included in the Elections code.] __________________________________________________________________ 4.

The Judicial Council failed to uphold the due process requirements that the

Elections Violations Form be submitted to and forward by the Elections Director along

The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

5

with her amicus curiae briefs as required by the Elections Code and Judicial Rules of Procedure.

Item 7: Campaign Violations/Disqualification Section B. The process of obtaining a campaign violation shall be regulated as follows1. In the event of a campaign violation, the individual(s) who witnessed the violation must immediately submit a Campaign Violation Report Form to the Elections Director. If the Campaign Violation Report Form is filed three (3) days after the claimed violation, the form will not be accepted. 2. Upon receipt of the Campaign Violation Report Form, the Elections Director will forward the form and an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief explaining the Elections Director’s opinion of the legitimacy of the claimed violation to the Judicial Branch. 3. The Judicial Branch shall then, pursuant to the Judicial Rules of Procedure, make a determination regarding the authenticity of the alleged violation within a reasonable timeframe. If the Judicial Branch determines that the alleged violation is authentic, then they shall determine whether the violation deserves a strike pursuant to the Elections bylaws.

Judicial Rules of Procedure: Title V 5. Elections Violation a. This shall govern the procedures for an Elections Violation. b. Submission of Complaint amicus i. The Elections Director will submit the Complaint, along with an curiae , pursuant to the ASUCR Elections Code, to the Secretary of the Court and the Secretary of the Court will receive it. amicus curiae ii. The should outline the Elections Director’s opinion on the legitimacy of the alleged violation.

-[[Analysis: Here, Judicial Council failed to follow the process of the elections violation report form being filed to the elections director and forwarded to the Judicial Branch as also required by Title V, 5, e, v of the Judicial Rules of Procedure (quoted further below).]] __________________________________________________________________ Analysis of Decision on past Judicial Encroachment by Kyle Levy, JD (Independent Third- Party Parliamentarian who set Judicial Review Precedent for ASUCR in 2015) “While the Constitution in Article VI, Section C specifies that the Judicial Council should devise its own rules which shall have the same force as the rest of ASUCR’s governing documents, the modification of the Removal provision is an impermissible abuse of the Judicial Council’s discretion. Uniquely among the provisions of the Judiciary Article, the removal provision is explicitly stated to be within the sole purview of the Senate to interpret.”

The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

6

-[[Analysis: Likewise, the “procedure for the conduct of nominations, campaigns, and elections”, and “rules governing nominations, campaigns and elections, and “revisions of the timetable shall be made by Senate vote only” are powers explicitly stated to be within the sole purview of the Senate. Here, Judicial Council tried to extend the timeline and modify rules governing elections without a senate vote.]] “Far more than a procedure not otherwise provided for as most of the JCRP are, in Section 10, the Judicial Council has completely amended the wording of a provision already within the ASUCR Constitution. This is an encroachment on the Senate’s sole power to legislate. The intent of the framers of Article VI Section G in adding the limitation language was undoubtedly to provide a check and balance on the Judicial Branch that it would have no power to override.”

-[[Analysis: Likewise, the Judicial Branch’s power is not unlimited but explicitly bounded to “Regulate and review all elections violations during the yearly elections;” therefore, the Judicial Branch can NOT encroach on the senate’s sole power to legislate and decide whether to allow parties, set the elections timeline and any revisions to the elections procedures as they tried here.]] “There would be no logical reason for this language favoring the Senate to be included otherwise. In this case, the Judicial Council has greatly overstepped their bounds in an attempt to cause the very mischief that the language was offered to prevent. The Judicial Council has no authority to unilaterally modify the provisions that govern the process for their own removal, Such a modification can only be made through the Constitutional Amendment process. As a result, JCRP Section 10 does not trump the Constitution’s Removal Provision. It need not be paid any further attention and should not be referenced as an authority in this matter.”

--[[Analysis: Likewise, the Judicial Council has no authority to unilaterally modify or disregard the provisions of: •

• • •

•

•

“Separation and Balance of Powers: No individual or group of individuals within any of the branches may exercise powers delegated to or authority vested in any of the other branches” of Article II, SECTION B.of the constitution, “(e) Regulate and review all elections violations during the yearly elections;” of ARTICLE VI, SECTION E of the constitution, “(g) establish rules governing nominations, campaigns and elections for the elected offices of the ASUCR” of Article VI Section I. Powers of the Legislative Branch of the constitution, “The procedure for the conduct of nominations, campaigns, and elections shall be determined by the Senate. Elections operations shall be executed by the Elections Committee.” of ARTICLE VII, SECTION A. of the constitution, “1. The Elections Director shall prepare and present a timetable for a general election to the Senate by the end of the first academic quarter of each year, for approval. Any revisions of the timetable shall be made by Senate vote only” of Chapter VII, Part 5, Item 3 of the elections code, “the right of the Elections Director to use their discretion in suggesting solutions for matters that are not included herein to the Elections Committee” of Chapter VII,Part 4, Item 1, Section A, 3 of the election code

The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

7

•

•

“2. Upon receipt of the Campaign Violation Report Form, the Elections Director will forward the form and an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief explaining the Elections Director’s opinion of the legitimacy of the claimed violation to the Judicial Branch” of Chapter VII,Part 4, Item 7, Section B of the Election Code. “3. The Judicial Branch shall then, pursuant to the Judicial Rules of Procedure,” of Chapter VII,Part 4, Item 7, Section B of the Election Code.

-[[Analysis: Such a modification(s) to the constitutional provisions can only be made through the Constitutional Amendment process, but not pursued in this case.]] -[[Analysis: Such a modification(s) to the Bylaws and Election Code provisions can only be made through the Legislative Review Committee, and the Senate vote of the legislature. However, this was not pursued in this case.]] __________________________________________________________________ 5. The Judicial Council failed to uphold the due process rights of the would-be respondent, including a notice of at least 3 business days, giving which statutes they are being accused of violating, and the opportunity to make their defense and present evidence. Judicial Rules of Procedure: Title V 5. Elections Violation a. This shall govern the procedures for an Elections Violation. b. Submission of Complaint amicus i. The Elections Director will submit the Complaint, along with an curiae , pursuant to the ASUCR Elections Code, to the Secretary of the Court and the Secretary of the Court will receive it. amicus curiae ii. The should outline the Elections Director’s opinion on the legitimacy of the alleged violation. c. Acceptance/Denial of the Complaint amicus curiae i. The Judicial Council shall review the Complaint and the and make a decision by majority vote on whether to accept the Complaint and go to trial. 1. In a tie, the Judicial Council will default to an acceptance of the Complaint and a move forward to trial. ii. If the Judicial Council accepts the Complaint, the Complaint will move forward to trial. 1. The Judicial Council will promptly notify the Petitioner and Respondent by issuing a Summons, as outlined below. It will also notify the Elections Director that the Complaint has been accepted. iii. If the Judicial Council denies the Complaint, the Chief Justice or designee will issue a Summary Judgement on behalf of the Judicial Council. This simply states that the Judicial Council did not find that the Complaint contained sufficient merit to be accepted and to move forward to trial. The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

8

d. Arraignment i. The Judicial Council shall issue a Summons to the Petitioner and Respondent to appear at the date and time of the arraignment. This summons shall be with at least three (3) business days’ notice. 1. If an individual named on the Summons cannot appear at the date and time listed on the Summons, the individual shall file a Motion to Change Trial Date with the Judicial Council, and the Chief Justice or designee shall work with the individual to find a suitable solution. ii. On the date of the arraignment, the Chief Justice or designee shall read to the Court which statutes the Respondent is accused of violating. The Petitioner shall be asked whether he or she still wishes to pursue the charges. If the Petitioner responds in the affirmative, then the Chief Justice or designee shall ask the Respondent to enter a plea. 1. In a guilty plea, the Chief Justice or designee shall declare the Respondent guilty, and the Judicial Council will deliberate on sentencing for the Respondent. 2. In a not guilty plea, the Judicial Council shall set the date and time of the hearing, either at the arraignment or a reasonable amount of time after. nolo contendere 3. The plea of , or “no contest”, is not available in arraignments in the Judicial Council. e. Hearing i. The Chief Justice or designee shall call the Court to order. ii. Opening Argument 1. The Petitioner will have five (5) minutes for his or her opening argument, and the Respondent will then have five (5) minutes for his or her opening argument. iii. Witnesses 1. The Petitioner, and then the Respondent, will have each ten (10) minutes total to question their respective witnesses. 2. After each witness, the Judicial Council will pause the time to allow itself to ask questions of the witnesses. 3. After the Petitioner’s witnesses are questioned by the Petitioner, the Respondent will have two (2) minutes per witness to cross examine. After the Respondent’s witnesses, the Petitioner will receive the same opportunity. 4. After each cross examination, the Judicial Council will give itself another opportunity to question the witnesses. iv. Closing Argument 1. The Petitioner will have three (3) minutes for his or her closing argument, and the Respondent will then have three (3) minutes for his or her closing argument. v. Elections Director 1. Though the Elections Director will have submitted an ____to the Judicial Council, he or she will be allowed three (3) minutes to speak to the Judicial Council at this time, if he or she so chooses. Only the Elections Director is authorized to use this time. There will be no designee allowed to come in lieu of the Elections Director, and the Elections Director shall not be allowed to question any witnesses. a. This section shall not apply if the Elections Director is the Petitioner or Respondent.

Kyle Levy, JD (Independent Third- Party Parliamentarian who set Judicial Review Precedent for ASUCR in 2015) “3) On the question of the Senate's holding of an emergency meeting The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

9

UNCONSTITUTIONAL – The ASUCR Governing documents require at least 48 hours notice for an official meeting. Less than 8 hours notice was given here. There is no exception for emergencies provided for in the Constitution or Bylaws. Anytime that requirement was ignored in the past is also a violation of the ASUCR governing documents… The 48 hour requirement is to protect the interests of the Associated Students from hasty action being taken. If the Senate believes 48 hours is too long of a time frame, they are always able to pursue a constitutional amendment through the appropriate process to create an emergency meeting procedure. Failing that, they simply cannot ignore the Constitution because they find it to be inconvenient.”

-[[Analysis: Likewise, the Judicial Rules of Procedure Title V specifically outlines the types of cases normally heard by the Judicial Council, specifically 5. Election Violations, which require at least 3 business days’ notice to the respondent. Here, not even an 8 hours notice or any notice was given to the would-be respondent or the election director. Furthermore, the would-be respondent was not given any opportunity present their defense and evidence. There is no exception for emergencies or unusual circumstances provided for in the Judicial Rules of Procedure.]]

The ASUCR Senate co-signed below does not accept nor acknowledge the Judicial Council’s recent Majority Opinion - W17-JR-05 due to its encroachment of the powers of the Legislative and Executive branches, its failure to follow the due process of the Judicial Rules of Procedures, and the undermining of the systems of separations of powers and checks and balances between the 3 branches.

The Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) is the officially recognized student voice at UCR to the campus administration, faculty, and outside community. We aim to serve the UCR community through advocacy, education, and empowerment and work to enrich the undergraduate experience by bringing relevant issues and programs to the student body. ASUCR SENATE

10