By Vince Gasparini | October 28, 2024
A bill that would have codified multiple powers of the University at Albany Student Association Supreme Court was referred back to the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Operations (SOGO) and the Committee on Rules and Administration after multiple Senators expressed concern over grammatical changes made to the bill at Wednesday (10/23) night’s Senate meeting.
Both SOGO and the Committee on Rules and Administration approved of the bill after reviewing it once again on Friday (10/25).
Photo Credit: Vince Gasparini / The ASP
The bill, drafted by Chief Justice Steven Jimenez and introduced by SOGO Chair Senator Luke Johnson, would have most notably codified the right of the Supreme Court to impose a motion to seal in order to protect the privacy and integrity of ongoing court cases. It also would have ensured that the Supreme Court would not have to comply with orders from SOGO in regards to issuing motions to seal, but that they would still be consulted when making the decision.
However, multiple Senators became weary of the bill after Senators Nic Feldman and Marcos Perez made numerous grammatical changes to it.
“I think essentially changing half of the bill on the floor in amendments is inappropriate,” Vice Chair Sidney Wheeler said during debate. “I think that if that was the case, it should have been pulled and brought back through [the Committee on] Rules [and Administration] to do these amendments. These amendments should be happening in committee, if not before.”
Wheeler’s sentiment was echoed by Senator Jac Cooper, who said “this is a completely different bill than what passed [the Committee on] Rules [and Administration]. It feels like the entire spirit of the bill has been changed. There were a lot of major amendments, so that just concerns me.”
Perez argues that the changes made to the bill did not change the meaning and that Chief Justice Jimenez and Senator Johnson were consulted about them.
“The series of amendments that Nic and I, mostly I, got onto the bill were just items that we had already discussed,” he told the ASP. “This was not something that Senators that were a part of these committees were surprised by or shocked by. There was support for it.”
Jimenez said during the meeting that the changes in the wording were an important aspect of the bill to ensure it provided the necessary power it intended to give to the Supreme Court.
“It says that the court has the final say in decision making,” he said. “Cleaning up the wording here is to ensure that we still have that authority to still be able to say we have a final say but that we take SOGO’s recommendations seriously.”
Feldman said that he thinks Senators were hesitant of the bill because they did not fully understand the changes that were being made, and that he is thankful the bill was referred back to the committees because he believes it would not have passed if it didn’t.
“Making all of these changes, I think, made people a little bit unsettled, which I understand,” Feldman told the ASP. “If the bill did not get referred back to SOGO and [the Committee on] Rules [and Administration] I think the bill would have died.”
Comments