ASUO Constitution Court Chief Justice Nick Schultz and Justice Cedar Cosner will be making their decision Monday tonight on Justice Allison Apana’s petition to review ASUO Senator Bryan Vanderpool’s motion to remove her from office.
In her petition, Apana says according to the ASUO Constitution, the only reason a justice can be removed from office is if they are found guilty of nonfulfillment. Her petition requests the motion to remove her should be reviewed because according to her, Vanderpool’s motion is based solely on opinion, which doesn’t qualify as being a nonfulfillment of duties.
A court decision like this one is usually dealt with by all of the justices, but due to the petition coming from Apana, she won’t be involved in the process. Justice Caleb Huegel will also not be participating in the decision. According to him, he doesn’t want to be apart of the court’s decision because her petition isn’t valid.
“The Court has no authority,” he said, “to rule on Justice Apana’s petition for review because she does not have the right to submit it.”
He points to ASUO Constitution section 11.9 (PDF) where Constitution Court members are not allowed to refer such questions “regarding correct construction or interpretation of any part of the Constitution or any rule promulgated under it to the (court.)”
In addition to claiming Apana’s petition is invalid, he also requested Schultz relieve himself of making a decision in this matter as well, due to the alleged romantic relationship between Schultz and Apana. Schultz rejected Hueguel’s recusal.
“(Justice Cosner),” Schultz said, “didn’t feel that the evidence was sufficient enough for me to recuse myself.”
According to him, the court ruled in his favor by a vote of 2-1.
“Even though I’m named in this,” he said, “and that I’m upset with how I’ve been portrayed, and while I believe these statements are inaccurate, there’s no bias or self-interest in how I’ll make my decision on this matter.”
Also according to him, he and Cosner plan on making a decision on Apana’s petition Monday night, no matter how late it gets. Huegel will not be in attendance at all, but Apana will be present — even though the discussion will be about her removal. She is needed so that quorum can be satisfied — according to Court Rule 9.7 (PDF), she needs to be present in order to fulfill the bare minimum of justices who need to be present. Even though she will be present, she is not allowed to interact with Cosner or Schultz during the deliberation, in any regard.
“Justice Apana will not participate in any deliberations, any discussions and any voting,” Schultz said. “She will not be writing things down on paper or talking. She will be doing absolutely nothing except for sitting as quiet as possible.”