The Union Judiciary (UJ) found Senator for Off-Campus Students Bryan Lober '06 guilty of a breach of constitutional duties last Tuesday for not attending his committee meetings. He has subsequently been removed from his position.In Brandeis Student Union Senate v. Lober, Lober was found not guilty on three counts-violating the preamble, preventing Vice President Kenneth Gantz '04 from fulfilling his constitutional duties and failing to do the duties of Off-Campus Senator. He was unanimously impeached for these charges during an executive session on Feb. 29.

During the trial on March 15, the Union also charged that Lober failed to hold office hours and had poor attendance at Senate and committee meetings.

The defense argued to no avail on the counts because no records or documents existed of these charges.

The UJ released its decision last Tuesday with Chief Justice Rachel Present '06 and Associate Justices Susan Abrams '04 and Avner Fink '04 in agreement.

Associate Justice Samuel Dewey '06 dissented, saying the Court did not offer an appropriate explanation for their decision.

"A majority of this Court does not merely disregard the law, it flaunts its disregard in the manner of a two-penny whore flaunting her wares," Dewey wrote.

Dewey refused to comment on his 47-page dissent.

Based on the testimony of Kassian Polin '05, head of the diversity committee, Lober "has not attended all committee meetings-and indeed, has scarcely attended one."

According to Article XI, Section 2 of the Union By-laws, a senator is "to attend all meetings of the Senate and committees on which they serve."

Senator of the Class of 2005 Mitchel Balsam, who represented the Union in the case, was pleased with the decision.

"Justice was served, in a sense," Balsamn said. "It's a very significant victory for Student Union accountability."

Lober was surprised upon hearing the UJ decision and said he found the ruling "sad."

"Based on the fact that I was unanimously found not guilty on three of the four counts, it should be apparent that the entire impeachment was a vindictive tool, indicative of a double standard, used to weed out a senator who consciously chose to remain out of the obvious clique and vote solely based upon his constituents' best interest," he said.

Jeremy Widder '06, who acted as one of Lober's lawyers, said he was "disgusted" with the verdict.

"It's an absolute travesty what happened," he said. "The UJ was derelict in their duty in this case. It's a horrible miscarriage of justice."

Widder agrees with Dewey's dissent, "save for the hyperbole."

"Justice Dewey possessed the strongest grasp of the situation and was the most legally minded both in terms of the intent and the letter of the law," Lober said.

Balsam emphasized the precedent this case sets for senators.

"It's important that people go to committee meetings, serve their office hours," he said. "It's not like every person who misses a committee meetings is impeached, but only when one is very derelict."

"The Senate decided that Lober was not fit as a senator and he was convicted," Balsam said.

Widder had different perspective.

"The Senate recently tried to impeach another senator [Charles River Senator Greer Haputman '05], Widder said. "Democracy should not allow dissent to equal punishment. I hope this is not my Student Union government. It is repulsive to the sense of a Brandeis student that this court tries to actively quash dissent."

According to Widder, the UJ did not want to follow its own precedent and used no legal reasoning.

Balsam was disappointed in the UJ's decision on counts upon which Lober was found not guilty.

"It might set a dangerous precedent, not holding people responsible for the preamble," he said. "It's a Senate understanding that you are responsible to follow all parts of the constitution.