In a hearing Monday night, the Union Judiciary rejected a request to remove a proposed amendment from the second round of Student Union voting scheduled to take place on Wednesday.The amendment would more than double the amount of Student Union resources allocated to Brandeis Television while reducing the percentage of funding distributed to the Justice, WBRS, the Archon yearbook, Student Events, BEMCo and the Waltham Group.

"We think [the judiciary decision] went as we expected," former BTV director and current head of the station's amendment campaign Nate Westheimer '05 said. "We hoped and we saw that the justices ruled in favor of the democratic process," he said.

The judiciary complaint, filed by Village Quad Senator David Fried '06, asserted that the signatures collected by BTV in support of its amendment should be invalidated. Fried argued that the signatures were unacceptable because the station's original petition claimed to leave BEMCo and Waltham group funding intact. The amendment would actually cause these groups to lose funding.

"Most [students] are probably taking all the claims made by BTV...in good faith," Fried said. "Most of them have probably not sat down with a calculator to work out every number."

BTV has maintained that it never intended to take money from those groups and that the error was due to a mathematical miscalculation.

"The initial spirit of the amendment is completely intact," Westheimer said.

The case was heard by the five-member Student Union Judiciary board on the third floor of Shapiro Campus center. Fried presented his own arguments at the hearing while Josh Sugarman '05 represented the position of BTV.

Several of the justices said they were skeptical of Fried's appeal, repeatedly questioning his assertion that "irreparable harm" would be done to the student governmental system if the amendment was not removed from this week's ballot.

Responses to the decision were mixed from groups who will lose funding if the amendment is passed.

BEMCo director Jonathan Sham '06 stated that "because of the nature of the [calculating] mistake and BTV's original intention not to take money from BEMCo, we are currently taking no position on the amendment as it stands."

The Waltham Group also said they wished to remain neutral on the issue. In a statement from group leaders, the organization declared that it was "taking no political stand" on the issue because its members "both support and oppose the amendment for their own reasons."

Daniel Lowenstein '06, editor of the Archon yearbook, took a more critical stance, claiming that BTV's approach was "sort of underhanded."

Lowenstein said, "They just came to us and said 'hey, we're taking your money.'"

Student Events director Arielle Rosner '05 saw the proposed amendment as a positive opportunity for BTV to grow.

"I think that [BTV] could use the extra money to make a new studio and to advertise a channel just for films," Rosner said.

David Fudman '07, editor in chief of the Justice said that both he and his organization oppose the measure, claiming that a reduction in funding would reduce the number of articles and issues produced by the paper.

"We believe that on its merits, the amendment should and will be defeated," he said.

WBRS declined to comment on the amendment.