Thursday, April 15, 2010
ASUN spending of $1.6M illegal, Council finds
Last night and early this morning, the ASUN Judicial Council released its orders in three remaining cases challenging the legal sufficiency of several acts of the Senate during its 76th Session, including bills authorizing spending for the 2008-2009 fiscal year. (Last discused here.)
In unanimous opinions, the Council declared the 2009 fiscal year budget was not legally passed and thus all money ASUN spent was without legal authorization. The Council also invalidated most of the 76th Senate's actions because of gross violations of the Open Meeting Law and because the Senate's secretary fraudulently certified the passage of legislation.
The opinions effectively wipe the 76th Session from the books, finding that the Senate and other ASUN officers did not fulfill their legal and constitutional requirements during the course of enacting legislation.
The Council excoriated the Senate, its Speaker, and ASUN President Eli Reilly for not following the proper, legal processes. These rulings come after the defending parties in the cases admitted liability but plead the Council look past the errors since they were not committed with malicious intent.
With these rulings, experts in ASUN process agree that they could serve as valuable precedents to overturn much of what the 77th Session did, including the budget for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30.
These rulings come on the heals of 78th Session convening last night. The Council also ordered the opinions to be read to the new senators in an open meeting so they can be apprised of the seriousness of the situation they now find themselves in.
We expect to have a fuller analysis in the near future.
Updated to clarify that Geremia was not held personally responsible. The office was sued, and she was in the office at the time these rulings were signed.
Posts
I'm confused, the UNR SFL are claiming this senate was invalidated, you say the 76th session is invalidated, with Gracie Geremia being targeted. Wasn't she a regular senator member then?
ReplyDeleteTrue, but the person holding the speaker's office during the 76th Session wasn't sued in an individual capacity. Remember, these suits originated before the 76th Session ended. Therefore, Gracie Geremia was the legal successor to the suit because she was the one holding the office at the time. Think of it this way, the office was being sued, not the officer.
ReplyDelete