A dispute between Student Union senators questioning the constitutionality of the Senate's decision to use funds from a Senate Money Resolution to help bring Bill Ayers and Robert H. King to campus reached the Union Judiciary last Saturday, but the UJ did not release a decision on the case by press time. The UJ decided to hear the case Saturday, March 8 after Senator for the Class of 2009 Eric Alterman filed a complaint against the Union Senate and against Senators for the Class of 2011 Lev Hirschhorn and Alex Melman, stating that the SMR violated Article IX, Section 1 of the Student Union Constitution by allowing funding for the events to come from the Senate Discretionary Fund. The section reads: "All Senate Money Resolutions must be used for Student Union Government projects and/or operations."

The Senate voted 10-8 at its March 1 meeting to provide $900 to bring Ayers, a founding member of the Weather Underground, and King, a member of the Black Panther Party, to Brandeis.

The main debates between both the respondents and Alterman, the petitioner, included whether the Ayers and King events were, by definition, Union projects or club projects, as well as to what extent previously passed Student Money Resolutions, such as $1,500 for the hopeFound Gala this winter and $500 for the Prospect Hill project last fall could serve as examples for projects that received Union Senate funding without prior Union involvement.

In his brief closing arguments, Alterman stated that "the Union's involvement was far too minimal and arguable to fall within the bylaws." Melman restated that the Ayers and King events were always meant to be events with substantial Union involvement and that the Social Justice Committee now co-sponsoring the events proves that.

Alterman's counsel was Massell Quad Senator Nipun Marwaha '12 and Student Union Director of Communications Jamie Ansorge ''09. The Union's counsel was Cstle Senator Nathan Robinson '11 and Ryan McElhaney '10 from the Office of Community Advocacy.

Alterman argued in his opening statement to the court that there was no Student Union involvement in the planning of the Ayers and King visits in the time between Feb. 22 when the SMR was first presented to the Senate, and March 1, when the SMR was passed.

He also argued that since Hirschhorn and Melman hold positions on both the Senate and the Executive Board of Democracy for America, one of the co-sponsors of the Ayers anad King events, they have an unfair advantage in their ability to request funding that other clubs trying to bring speakers to campus do not have.

In Robinson's opening arguments he made clear that the SMR did not grant money to a club but to a particular event sponsored by multiple clubs and departments on campus. He also argued that the Ayers and King events were always intended to be Union projects and therefore passing the SMR supporting it was in no way illegal. He also voiced his opinion that if this SMR was deemed illegal, it would limit future SMRs to projects initiated by the Union or senators only and would prevent senators from finding and supporting projects they felt could enrich the Brandeis community.

DFA campus coordinator Shanna Rifkin '11, a witness for the petitioner, was asked by Ansorge to read the DFA club minutes from the meeting prior to the passing of the Senate Money Resolution. These minutes showed no mention of Union involvement in the Ayers event. In cross-examining by McElaney, Rifkin was asked, "Are DFA minutes reliable?" Rifkin testified, "No."

Ansorge questioned Student Union Director of Community Advocacy Andrew Hogan '11 about a document Hirschhorn, DFA and Students for a Democratic Society submitted at a February Jump Start meeting, where clubs planning events met with Student Activities, the Student Union, Public Safety and Conference and Events.

Ansorge asked Hogan, who attended the meeting as a Union representative, whether the Union was listed on this document or if, in his opinion, the event was supposed to be a collaboration with the Union. Hogan responded, "No," to both questions.

Student Union Treasurer Max Wallach '09 had previously submitted a statement that was read at the March 1 Senate meeting expressing concerns about the SMR. The statement urged Hirschhorn and Melman to recuse themselves from the vote due to a conflict of interest, as well as for the entire Senate to evaluate if $900 of their declining budget should go to such a controversial project.

Executive Senator and Acting Vice President Andrew Brooks '09 was questioned by both the petitioner and respondents on many Senate procedures, as well as the previous SMRs... "The previous SMRs may have violated the bylaws, but the past precedent is not in question. . This particular SMR is," Brooks testified.

He was then asked by McElhaney if the Ayers-King SMR was granted for the speaker or for the clubs in question. "Technically the SMR is worded that way [to go to the speakers], but it actually goes to the clubs sponsoring the event," Brooks responded.

The first witness for the respondents was Liza Behrendt '11, organizer of the Ayers and King events. "We always anticipated the event being a campuswide collaboration. . The Union was not listed on the document for the Jump Start meeting because we didn't have confirmed involvement; placing them on that would have been presumptuous," she testified. Ansorge questioned her if the involvement DFA was seeking from the Union was monetary. "Originally it was purely intellectual colloboration we were seeking; when we realized we would not be able to cover all the costs of the event, we sought out many other sponsors on campus," she said.

A member of the UJ also asked Behrendt if DFA still would have sought the Union's involvement had DFA aquired all the necessary funds itself.

"We were always hoping for their involvement, especially the Social Justice Committee, which [Hirschhorn] is the chair of, so yes we would have," she replied.

Senator for the Class of 2012 Supreetha Gubbala and Meryl Shulman '10, co-chair of the Social Justice Committee, both testified that there was talk of collaboration and co-sponsorship in the Union regarding the Ayers-King event as early as the Feb. 12.

Hirshhorn was the last witness for the case and testified that he was acting as chair of the Social Justice Committee, as well as an executive board member of DFA and a Senator for the Class of 2011 when he voted on the SMR.

"When I was voting I was wearing many hats; I didn't excuse myself because constituents asked me not to and [neither] did [Melman]," he said.