E-mail
Print
Court needs influx of justices
By Chris Walker
Our student government needs to be taken seriously. … It’s now up to Prahl to fill these (court) vacancies; but it’s up to us to make sure she follows through on her responsibilities.
Another justice seat is vacant in the already tumultuous Student Association’s University Student Court, which means that the court cannot function properly.
In order for the court to work, it requires a quorum, or three out of the five possible positions filled on the bench. With the resignation of Chief Justice Neal Michals, the court now has only two of its seats full.
Essentially, this means that our student government lacks one of the three branches of government necessary to function: that of the judiciary.
A brief civics lesson will tell you that the legislative makes the laws and the executive enforces those laws. The judiciary’s role in three-branch democracy is to interpret those laws and deem whether they are within the boundaries of the government’s constitution.
This missing leg of democracy is unacceptable. It is my hope that SA President Samantha Prahl will work with the Senate to fill this vacancy as fast as possible.
For the time being, we must ask ourselves: why is the court constantly in a state of not fulfilling quorum? And what exactly can be done about it?
One of the problems stems from the fact that we have left two seats unoccupied for a good time now. This year, we are lucky if we have all three seats required for quorum occupied. The SA must make it a priority to keep all five seats full. This will prevent the resignation of a single justice from effectively shutting the court down until a replacement can be found.
A second problem is the term of office for University Student Court members, which is currently set at two years for every justice. While a longer term for justices in governments outside of the SA may be beneficial, for the SA it may not work out so well.
Having a justice sit longer than a president is beneficial in that it ensures that a president cannot pack a court full of justices that benefit him/her.
Nevertheless, the longer term can make the post undesirable to some. For many students at UWM, two years is a good chunk of time to be spending resolving parking ticket disputes. We may be able to resolve this by making the post last for a shorter period of time, perhaps a year or three semesters rather than two years.
This doesn’t, however, diminish the third problem we see: resigning justices. I do not mean to criticize Neal Michals in any way; if his schedule was too conflicting to handle a place on the court, then it better serves the court to have Michals step down.
However, it’s imperative for Prahl to seek future court members who can fulfill their judicial duties to the full extent of their term. These candidates should have a limited schedule so that other activities will not interfere with their responsibility to the court.
Our student government needs to be taken seriously. And those in charge do take it seriously. It is through them, after all, that funds for groups and activities are given.
It’s now up to Prahl to fill these vacancies; but it’s up to us to make sure she follows through on her responsibilities. Once we have the court back and running, we must make sure it stays running.
Through the suggestions I have provided above, the court should be able to run even if another justice resigns in the near future.
> Comments