Innovation Escapes Election Disqualification

By , , , and

Read the Supreme Court Opinion

Read the Concurring Opinion

The Innovation party sang the University of Utah fight song as they waited for the ASUU Supreme Court to decide their party?s destiny. Today, Innovation is still singing, even shouting, as their appeal against an earlier disqualification was granted.

?Hey guys, I?m still running,? shouted Innovation presidential candidate Steve Nelson to supporters who waited until 12:30 a.m. for the ruling.

Innovation party members crowded around the Associated Students of the University of Utah glass office doors waiting more than an hour for the Supreme Court?s ruling this morning.

?We couldn?t have been more pleased,? said Innovation vice- presidential candidate Nick Paulk.

The Innovation party appealed the earlier ASUU Elections Committee ruling that disqualified them from the presidential race.

No Bull filed the grievance, which resulted in the disqualification, stating Innovation had not reported the correct fair-market value of their purchased campaign items as Redbook, the ASUU constitution, mandates. No Bull said instead the party included the bargain price for goods in their disclosure.

No Bull said this allowed Innovation to gain an unfair advantage over other parties, in the amount of goods and the amount paid for those goods.

The elections committee agreed, but the Supreme Court said the committee ?erred? in their decision.

The Supreme Court decided to overturn the decision because the penalty was too harsh, and the rules were too vague for solid definition, therefore disqualification was unfair to Innovation.

?To impose a remedy as harsh as disqualification of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates, in a case where it is not obvious that a violation has occurred, would be fundamentally unfair and unjust. In a society governed by laws, individuals must have the right to march up to the very edge of the law without falling off that edge,? said the Supreme Court?s ruling.

Five of the six justices signed the court?s majority opinion. Jusitce Angelina Tsu concurred.

Tsu wrote a concurring opinion stating she did agreed with the court?s finding, but was left with different feelings.

?I struggle with what truly seems to be a violation of the spirit of the law,? Tsu said. ?Although I stand by the majority in this decision, I cannot honestly say that I feel good about it.?

Innovation campaign manager Marshall McDonald said defending his party in the Supreme Court Tuesday was the hardest thing he had ever done, and is glad the trial is closed.

?It?s a feeling of relief,? McDonald said.

Campaign adviser Jay Hart agreed with McDonald.

?I thought from the beginning we acted under Redbook,? Hart said.

The ruling overjoyed Innovation.

?I feel absolutely wonderful,? Nelson said.

The party ran out the doors of the A. Ray Olpin University Union with shouts of joy to their supporters.

?We?re going to go home and sleep easy,? Paulk said.

No Bull, was also happy with the results.

?I?m excited about it,? said Ben Lowe, No Bull presidential candidate.

Both parties said they did not think the recent committee ruling, nor the Supreme Courts injunction affected either party?s ballot standing.

?I don?t think this would have affected the outcome,? Hart said.

Lowe agreed, and was happy that voters would be the ones to select their future student leaders.

?Hopefully it affected the voter turnout in a positive manner,? Lowe said.

No Bull heard the Supreme Court?s decision through current ASUU President Jess Dalton who was present while the Supreme Court wrote their decision.

?It doesn?t matter whether I agree with it or not,? Dalton said. ?It matters that I support the system?I can?t help but think [the Supreme Court] acted responsibly.?

The winner of the ASUU election will be announced tonight at 10 p.m. in the Union Ballroom.

?What a great victory?we hope we can make it two,? Nelson said.