Submit a Request
There are two kinds of requests you can make with the Supreme Court.
Type 1: Advisory Opinion, where you can ask the court for clarification on specific texts within the Student Government Constitution and Student Government Code. In order for this request to be accepted there can be no aggrieved party or rule violation to rectify.
Type 2: Complaint, these cases are those which are appeals of Election Board or Rules and Standards Commission decisions or involve violations of the Student Government Constitution and Student Government Code.
NOTE: If this is an emergency or time sensitive issue please email email@example.com now with a brief summary of the issue and you will be contacted as soon as possible.
Direct all questions and concerns to the Supreme Court at firstname.lastname@example.org
The primary question before the Court was for guidance as to how absences from required events effect overall attendance and if those absences can be used for impeachment. The Court decided to create reasonable limitations on required event times and confirmed that absences from required events are the same as missing a required meeting.
The complainant requested injunctive relief pending a hearing by the Court related to the issue of a resolution passed by the Senate on September 8, 2014 with 13 votes in the favor, 8 votes against and 5 abstained votes. The complainant believed that this violates Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution which requires a majority vote to pass any Senate action. The Notice of Complaint was rejected and injunction denied by the Court.
An order desolving an Injuncation and reinstating the Election Board disqualification of Abdualrahman Muhialdin.
The complainant requested relief in the form of an extension of the Student Government scholarship and granting by the Supreme Court that the scholarship is open to member of Student Government. The complainant believed that the Scholarships Act granted access to Student Government members.
In addition to the specific relief granted in this case the Supreme Court established an Order of Precedence doctrine by which all other cases are measured.
The Supreme Court granted the relief but declared segment of the Scholarships Act unconstitutional through an analysis of the consitutional relation to statues, using the Order of Precedence doctrine. As a result the Court could not convict President Young of a violation per se.