Supreme Court hears senator's complaint

The IU Student Association Supreme Court heard a complaint from IUSA Senator Dietrich Willke Wednesday night concerning the constitutionality of some senators and congressmen representing the wrong constituencies.\nWillke asked the court for an interpretation of Article Two, Section Seven of the IUSA Constitution, which states a member of congress may be impeached and removed from office "upon presentation of a petition to the congress that the member is no longer a member of the constituency." That petition must be approved by two-thirds of congress.\nWillke originally filed a complaint to the Supreme Court because of discrepancies concerning 13 IUSA senators. He said some senators were representing a certain constituency but were actually in a different school or were living in a different residence than what they were representing.\n"I thought when a person runs, there would be a background check on them," Willke said in his presentation to the court.\nWillke said he not only wants to make sure he's interpreting the constitution correctly, but wants to clarify what needs to be done concerning due process of senators.\n"I want to look into the more general problem of IUSA validity," he said.\nWillke, who helped write IUSA's new constitution, said he believes that any senator found to be representing the wrong constituency should simply be removed from congress, rather than going through a petition and a two-thirds vote from congress as stated in the constitution. He said he would like to see that part of the constitution changed or clarified.\n"You need to look at the bigger picture," Willke said. "If you suddenly either by choice or by sheer bad luck are not part of the jurisdiction, you're automatically removed (in most democracies)." \nHe said it should be the same for IUSA as well.\nIn a brief written by IUSA Vice President Judd Arnold, he argued that the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction in Willke's complaint.\n"Mr. Willke should follow the procedures set forth in the constitution," Arnold said. "He needs to submit a petition to congress calling for the removal of those members he stated in his brief." \nOne of the senators named in Willke's complaint, junior Emily Plotkin, told the supreme court that although she is currently representing the University Division for IUSA, she recently became an education major. Both Willke and Plotkin agreed that something needs to be done to define whether a student going through the natural progression from UDIV to another school should continue to represent UDIV.\n"I think (senators) would be better representing the University Division than another school because they've only been (in another school) for a semester," Plotkin said.\nThe Supreme Court said they hoped to make their decision in the case before the end of the year, but Willke said he just hopes they take their time discussing the matter.\n"I hope that they make the best decision for the validity of IUSA," he said. "I don't want them to rush. I want them to make the best decision possible"