For the record...

For the record books, poll results below. By the way, anyone see this kinda amazing quote from the JEC Counsel?

"Nowhere in the rules or charter is there an allowance, even for honest mistakes."

New poll question is up.

Boyer v. JEC Liveblog

Trial Update: Hearing Moved to Monday - LIVEBLOG! - Amicus Brief

The Kyle Boyer trial has been moved to Monday at 9:30pm in Marvin Center 401.

There will be a liveblog here on GWBlogSpot covering every nuance of the hearing and maybe even a live video stream. How exciting!

Also, if you're closely following the trial, you shouldn't miss the very interesting Amicus Brief filed by law students Michael Williams and Stephen Glatter over concern that the court is not properly applying US jurisprudence when it hears cases.

From the brief:

Amici curiae are a group of law students from The George Washington University Law School. Amici curiae are interested in this case because of their general interest in the field of law and their commitment to the fair administration of justice. In particular, amici curiae are concerned with the relatively inadequate legal reasoning advanced by many of the parties in the present case, including this Court. Therefore, amici curiae offer their limited expertise in the hopes that it will help clarify some of the important legal issues for this Court’s consideration.

Amici curiae offer two alternative interpretations of this Court’s standard of review, based upon the two traditional interpretations of the “arbitrary and capricious” and “abuse of discretion” standards in American courts. Amici curiae do not go so far as to say which standard this Court should adopt in this particular case. Nevertheless, this Court should not avoid adopting a clear standard of review—when such clear standards are readily available in U.S. jurisprudence—merely by sticking its head in the sand and declaring itself unwilling to listen to “legalese.” (Writ of Cert. at 1.)

Things are getting exciting. Stay tuned to GWBlogSpot for more news and frequent updates.

UPDATE: Another wonderfully written and well argued amicus brief from immediate past chair and immediate past vice chair of the JEC, Benjamin Balter and William Rone, in response to a not-so-well-written, not-so-well-argued amicus brief filed several days ago by former Student Court Chief Judge Ryan Sullivan. You'll notice that Balter and Rone go with straightforward logic in their response to Sullivan, and ditch the "legalese" the concerned law students ask for in their brief.

Also, see the court's response to the concerned law students' brief, if you really want to.

All trial-related documents can be read and downloaded here.

UPDATE 2: A very well written and well reasoned amicus brief just posted. Filed by former JEC investigator Jake Greenberg for Boyer.

Showdown Tuesday Night - Boyer v. JEC

Inside the SA broke the news this morning.

The Student Court will hear Kyle Boyer v. JEC this Tuesday night. Time and place TBD.

To see the (rather stern) writ of certiorari issues by Chief Judge Christopher Wimbush, click here.

From the writ:

Each side will be given 30 minutes to clearly and succinctly present their arguments. While the Chief Judge retains the authority to grant each side additional time to present arguments, no such additional time will be granted in this case. Requests for rebuttals will also not be granted in this case. The Court also advises parties that their oral arguments be direct, focused, and well- articulated. The Court also recommends that parties avoid excessive use of legalese in their briefs as well as in their oral arguments.

To what I'm sure will be to your great delight: GWBlogSpot will be liveblogging the trial.

Since the election cannot constitutionally be held any later than the 25th-26th, an opinion will almost certainly come out Tuesday evening.

It's going to be a busy day.

Spring Break Update: Boyer v. Joint Elections Committee

While the GW community has been on break, The Hatchet and Inside the SA have reported on the legal proceedings in the Student Court filed by Kyle Boyer against the Joint Elections Committee.

Boyer's filing, turned in on Monday, is lengthy and can be found here.

In brief, he challenges the JEC's ruling based on the "arbitrary and capricious" standard established in 1992 by the Student Court in Ferguson v. JEC, and later used in Cohen v. JEC in 2007 to undo the disqualification of a senator-elect.

A subsequent motion asking for summary judgment (or dismissal of the complaint) has been filed by the JEC, claiming that Kyle Boyer did not present sufficient evidence in his complaint to warrant a trial. That motion is best summarized in Logan Dobson's post linked here and above.

The court has yet to rule on whether or not it will hear the case.

Stay tuned for more updates and analysis.

Some recent poll results

Before taking them off the front page, here are some recent poll results. Got any suggestions for new poll questions we should ask?

(One option: A face-off of the winners below. "Which would you rather see in J Street: Kyle Boyer or Qdoba?" Just brainstorming...)

Breaking: Kyle Boyer to Challenge JEC Decision

In an e-mail message to campaign supporters forwarded to the GWBlogspot Kyle Boyer: said:

YES I am going to challenge the decision. Too many people have volunteered their time, changed their profile pics, etc. for me to not finish this race. As soon as we can, we will file with the Student Court, and hopefully begin the process of reversing the JEC and finishing this election.

As of now elections are slated for the end of March. However, when Boyer does file suit, there is a chance he could postpone the election further.

Boyer's Ticking Clock

(Before this post begins - I am no expert on the SA. In fact, quite the opposite. However, I have recently learned a bit and feel that I have the capacity to write this post analyzing the process. If you know a lot about the SA and spot any errors here, sound off in the comment section.)

It's been a hectic few days at GWBlogSpot, with everything that has been going on at the SA and JEC.

As we've commented in previous posts, and Boyer's campaign has confirmed, the next logical step for his campaign, in order to get back on the ballot, is to file a lawsuit with the SA Court challenging the JEC's ruling to disqualify him.

We now know that the election is scheduled for the 25th-26th. We return from Spring Break on the 23rd.

Even if Kyle filed tomorrow, or first thing on the 23rd when we return, something tells me that it will not be enough time for the court to schedule a hearing and rule on the issue. In the last lawsuit Kyle was involved in, the signature issue, the entire process took several days.

What will happen if he files and there is no time for a full hearing? Can the court issue an order to push the election back yet again? Will the SA get involved and move the runoff for a second time? Will the issue be heard by the court after the runoff, rendering it all moot? Will Kyle even bother to file an appeal, as his campaign has indicated it will, given the time constraints?

Who's to tell at the moment? But whatever happens, the clock is ticking.

UPDATE: Just for fun. Prediction: Kyle files on the 23rd, the Court orders another delay in the election, pending the court's ruling, which will be in early April. I won't speculate beyond that. Any of you have a prediction? Sound off in the comments section.

BREAKING: JEC Releases Fact and Finding Order

The JEC has released its 6-page Fact and Finding Order in the multiple Ballinger v. Boyer cases it dealt with tonight, disqualifying Mr. Boyer from his candidacy in the runoff.

The concluding sentence:

Pursuant to JEC Charter section 7120, as Mr. Boyer has accumulated more than six penalties in the given election period, we issue Mr. Boyer an order of disqualification.

News on the SA Court appeal and further details on the Fact and Finding Order will be reported as they become available.

A press release from the JEC, and undoubtedly Mr. Boyer and Ms. Bindelglass, are pending.

For Nick Polk's statement, see below.

UPDATE(x2 to reflect correction by Hatchet): Part of a statement given by Phil Bianchi to The Hatchet

"I think our next course of action is to go to the courts."

It's on.

Open Thread: What are you thinking about the Boyer situation?

The polls (on the left) are pretty split so far on the Kyle Boyer situation. Curious -- what are people thinking? Why was or wasn't the JEC right? Why should or shouldn't Kyle Boyer appeal? This is an open thread...

Breaking: Kyle Boyer off the Ballot

At a special election meeting tonight, the JEC found SA presidential candidate Kyle Boyer guilty of 5 violations.

Three were for overspending, one was for not reporting the use of a car, and one was for not reporting buying facebook ads.

Kyle therefore has a total of 8 violations, and was kicked off the ballot.

During the middle of the JEC announcement in Columbian Sqaure, Kyle got up from his seat and left the area.

Kyle does have the option to file an appeal in SA court.

Is Kyle Boyer In Trouble?

Student Assocation Presidential candidate Kyle Boyer allegedly failed to report four expenses in the expenditure report he submitted to the Joint Election Commission and may have actually exceeded the $1,000 spending limit, according to a complaint filed by senior Wylie Ballinger on March 2 and a subsequent report by The GW Patriot's Bill Flanigen.  

The Patriot writes:

Ballinger alleged that the financial statement provided by Boyer to the J.E.C. failed to report the fair market value of the car he used while campaigning on H street on February 25-26, a parking ticket he received, parking meter payments, and the cost of Facebook advertisements. The fourth violation report alleged that, when the undeclared expenses are included in the tabulation of Boyer’s spending, he surpassed the $1,000 spending limit for presidential candidates.

The student-run publication, which according to its website aims to promote conservative and libertarian views on campus, verifies Ballinger's claims:

An examination of Boyer’s expenditure report by the Patriot confirmed that the candidate did not report any spending for a car, a parking ticket, or meter payments, and that he reported no purchases of Facebook advertisements. Included in Ballinger’s complaints were pictures of a car being used by Boyer and his campaign supporters on H street in front of Kogan Plaza. A parking ticket was visible beneath a windshield wiper of the car.

Boyer, who fell just two votes short in the Feb. 25-26 election of preventing a run-off, has been penalized by the J.E.C. for three other campaign-related violations. 

If the J.E.C. finds him guilty of these violations, Boyer will have more than six violations and thus be disqualified.  

This means SA Senator Nick Polk, who finished third in the initial contest, would compete against SA Senator Julie Bindelglass, who placed second, in the March 11-12 run-off.  

The J.E.C. documents are not currently available online. 

GWblogspot would like to open up the comments section to discuss the merits of the complaint filed against Boyer. Please give us your input. 

Yes, SA, you may have a flood of worthless candidates

I am not a fan of SA politics (But I want you to run for an office - to learn why, keep reading).

Actually, I am not a fan of the SA in general. It produces huge egos and personalities who feel entitled to engage in public fights over issues that, 95% of the time, will not impact me and only affect those actually having the arguments that we are all forced to read and hear about.

Despite this, I am going to write about SA politics. I am not an expert on the venerable institution and I have only stumbled across this issue recently, but it has got me absolutely fuming.

Here you can find the "Decision and Orders of The Court of the George Washington University Student Association" (here is the full opinion) that affirms the passage of a bill stating that signatures are no longer required to run for a position within the SA (See, that's why I want you to run).

Here's a post on The Hatchet's website by Emily Cahn. An excerpt from the article is below (the emphasis is mine):

Signatures are no longer needed in order to run for a position within the Student Association after the Student Court voted to sustain the SA Senate’s veto override from this Tuesday night’s meeting.

...

SA President Vishal Aswani’s Vice President for Judicial and Legislative Affairs, Jordan Chapman, claimed that two-thirds of the entire senate body must vote in order to overturn a veto. However the court sided with Boyer, asserting that two-thirds of senators present and voting at the meeting was enough to garner a veto override.

Because the Court’s decision came a day before the candidate registration period ended, the Court ruled to extend the registration period until noon on Feb. 17, giving candidates an extra three and a half days to get their name on the ballot.

A longer version of that story is expected in Tuesday's Hatchet.

This means several things, some more immediate and some more lasting, if indeed judicial precedent exists in the SA (from my basic knowledge of the organization, it probably does not):

1. Fuzzy Math
Forevermore (if precedent applies), not the whole SA Senate, but a simple 2/3rds majority of a QUORUM of Senators can override a Presidential Veto. A quorum (from my basic understanding of this institution) is 13 Senators. Bear with me, readers, because now is when we get into the procedural stuff that Mr. Robert and the SA Barons like to opine about.

Quorum is 13. 2/3rds of 13 is 8.67, and since we won't be chopping up any of our upstanding SA Senators, that makes 9. If 9 people constitute 2/3rds of a quorum, that means that 9 senators (of around 30) can override a Presidential Veto. Talk about undermining the executive branch.

In short: 9/30 = 2/3.

Figure it out, GW, because now it's law.

2. Kyle Boyer: Masochist
Current SA Executive Vice President (who presides over the SA Senate) Kyle Boyer is a candidate for SA President.

Mr. Boyer was the main proponent of the "9 votes constitutes a 2/3rd majority in a 30 person governing body" legislative philosophy that prompted the lawsuit in the GW SA Court. He was the primary defendant.

Congrats on taking away one of the primary powers of the office you are pursuing, Mr. Boyer!

Ouch. Maybe should have thought of that one.

Number 3 (with a bullet): A High Probability of Crappy SA Candidates - You can be one too!
Yes, GWBlogSpot reader, you can be an SA Senate Candidate with naught but a pen stroke! Just fill out this form, drop it off at the Marvin Center Room 433/436 before noon on Tuesday, and you're in!

You don't have to campaign, you don't have to walk around and gather signatures to prove that you actually WANT the job, you can just fill out the form and further dilute the already somewhat milquetoast field of candidates for any number of SA offices.

I encourage everyone to take advantage of this unique opportunity to really mess with one very annoying institution.

Sign up to run - it's as easy as signing your receipt at Pita Pit. No, it's even better, it's free! And your name will be on a ballot! A real ballot! How cool is that?

Think of all the things you could do, even if you don't win! "George Washington University Student Association Presidential Candidate 2009" would look awfully impressive on a resume!

No effort necessary! Run for the SA, and turn it in before Tuesday at noon at the Marvin Center Room 433/436.

It's just too amusing not to.