Student Action has sued the Elections Council over interpretation of flyer cost. As strange as this may seem to non-ASUC types, those 'DONE' flyers that were so widely posted over the past two weeks did not count as Election Material last year. Considering how much SA spends on them, counting them as campaign material really hits against their finance limit.

This interpretation seems to have taken them by surprise, but they were never on firm legal ground. Here's their argument:

The issue is that potentially inaccurate and illegal instructions are still on the website with regards to party fliers. It's factually incorrect because in NO previous year have general party fliers (including DONE!) counted against all candidates.

Counting fliers in the way spelled out is inviolation of Title IV, 18.1.5 of the by-laws, which states the following: "Accordingly, material that only explicitly advocates a non-campaign function of a party or does not advocate any function of a party, shall not be included in the definition of campaign material."

The spending limit in the by-laws and the Constitution is on campaign materials, and therefore, counting party fliers that don't explicitly advocate for an election outcome or include a candidate or position as part of campaign materials is in clear contradiction to 18.1.5.

Please also note that a DONE! flier only explicitly advocates an accomplishment, and something with only a party name on it (like the Calserve fliers) does not explicitly advocate any function at all.

To consider trumpeting accomplishments two weeks before an election a 'non-campaign function' is looking for a loophole at best. It requires a very blind interpretation of the flyer's intent and context. So, not looking good for Student Action.Email This Post!