The Nevada Sagebrush

After a heated debate, the Associated Students of the University of Nevada Senate overrode President Sarah Ragsdale’s veto on the judicial rules bill at last week’s senate meeting.Ragsdale’s veto came after the senate approved the bill at its Nov. 14 meeting.

Ragsdale said the bill, which is based off the University of California, Berkeley’s judicial bylaws, was too confusing for students to understand and she didn’t want her name attached to it.

The bill, entitled the Judicial Rules Act, outlines procedures for ASUN’s judicial branch, which has jurisdiction in the Student Conduct Code and the Rules and Disciplinary Procedures for Members of the University Community. The judicial council also interprets the ASUN constitution upon request from the executive council or senate.

Sen. Sean McDonald said outlining the process for the judicial branch in the bill is something they have never had before.

He said the sooner the council receives the rules, the more effective the bill will be because it can tell the senate what problems the bill has. Then, the senate can take another look at the bill and make amendments where needed, he said.

Sen. Taylor Anderson said the committee plans to look at the Judicial Rules Act again, before winter break, but they might not get to it by then. If not before, the discussion will take place during the break, Anderson said.

Instead of returning the bill to the senate as vetoed, Ragsdale sent a memo. Although the constitution states the president must physically return the bill, or it is considered accepted, the senate overlooked the technicality so they could further discuss the bill in their Nov. 28 meeting, McDonald said.

“The intent was clearly to veto the bill,”McDonald said.

ASUN Attorney General Lindsey Sanford also saw problems with the bill’s ambiguity. She said many people could interpret the rules outlined in the bill differently, which could lead to someone justifying their personal motives with language stated in the bill.

For example, the bill states the chief justice can deviate from the rules. However, it does not say when, why or under what circumstances, she said.

Sanford said she worries someone could take advantage of the unclear language by not hearing both sides of an argument or leaving early.

“That was my main concern with the entire document,”she said.

Anderson, chair of the committee that drafted the bill, said Sanford did not express any of her concerns during the drafting process.

Sanford said her position is only to give opinions when requested, so she did not object during the meeting.

“It’s important that I don’t cross any lines,”Sanford said. “I’m just trying to follow my duties as specifically outlined.”

After considering the opinions of Ragsdale, Sanford and some senators, the senate overrode the veto because those problems could be fixed more quickly after the bill became law by amendments, Anderson said.

If the senate did not override the veto, the bill would have to be drafted from the beginning in the government operations committee, causing a delay in getting the judicial council rules to follow.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts