Supreme Court Justice

For students following the IU Student Association election debacle, Monday’s news provided much-needed relief. IUSA’s Supreme Court overturned a ruling by the Elections Commission, disqualifying the Kirkwood ticket and instating Big Red as the ticket-elect. As an act of final justice, we could hardly have hoped for better. \nOur staff editorial on the Elections Commission’s first ruling posed more questions than answers. And when the commission ruled a second time, its effect was only to impose an additional 20 percent fine to Kirkwood, while still leaving the ticket in office. It was far from satisfactory. The second time, the facts were known, but they seemed not to be enough. A lot of compelling evidence wasn’t recognized in the case, and the bigger issue of Weis’ lies hadn’t been dealt with. As the decision came out, most people saw clearly that if Kirkwood survived, IUSA would crumble. \nBig Red appealed the commission’s decision, allowed for if the commission displays “clear error, blatant abuse of discretion, or personal bias.” Big Red maintained that all three were present, and the Court concurred. After its own marathon deliberation, it made its decision to disqualify Kirkwood, with three justices excusing themselves from deliberation and one justice dissenting in part. The ruling still isn’t final – there’s an appeal pending that maintains the Supreme Court overstepped its bounds. This is the fault of a sloppy elections code, which puts “final” authority for elections disputes equally in the hands of Congress, the Elections Commission, and the Supreme Court. Obviously, this is a problem. \nIUSA limped away from this ordeal. At the end of the day it was the skill of the Court, not the quality of its laws, that saved IUSA from installing a crooked ticket and destroying whatever legitimacy it had left. The entire process exposed major weaknesses within the organization – Chief Justice Kate FitzGerald said of the Elections Commission, “I guess we just didn’t realize that they hadn’t gotten much guidance. I don’t believe that they had very many documents that necessarily outlined how to do things.” \nElections Committee Chair Sarah McDonough maintains that the Commission “did the best it could, given the circumstances.” She’s right. And although vague allegations of corruption are floating around, because a committee member was indeed in Kirkwood ticket presidential candidate Joe Weis’ fraternity, such allegations miss the point entirely: The committee was unable to do much of anything, least of all conspire. It was unfair to the committee to be put in this position, which was nothing more than a recipe for disaster.\nRegardless, the big issue now is how to move forward. All the IUSA tickets said in their campaigns that they wanted to increase student awareness of what IUSA does – all that accomplished was a larger audience for IUSA’s fumbling as it dealt with this scandal. And yet, within the outrage of most involved students is a silver lining – at least they still care. If Big Red can lead well, it might make this ordeal worth it after all. Now, the ball is in their court.