The ASUO Constitution Court on Tuesday upheld its earlier ruling that former Programs Finance Committee member Eden Cortez “acted in defiance of the rule of viewpoint neutrality,” ordering that he remain removed from the committee and the ASUO Student Senate.
Writing for the court, Chief Justice Randy Derrick stated that Cortez violated viewpoint neutrality but did not make a particular controversial statement listed in the initial petition filed against him.
Oregon Commentator Publisher Dan Atkinson, who filed the petition with the court after a Feb. 1 PFC hearing of the Commentator’s budget, stated in his grievance that Cortez said, “Of course we can look at content in determining a group’s value. Otherwise this job could be done by robots.”
Cortez previously told the Emerald he did not make the statement and filed an appeal with the court.
In a “thorough review” of written transcripts of the meeting, the court found that a member of the audience actually made the comment. It also determined that the “error made was a harmless error which did not prejudice the decision.”
Derrick wrote that Cortez could have responded to the initial petition instead of waiting until after the court had ruled. Not doing so showed a “lack of regard” that is “inexcusable,” he wrote.
“When considering the nature and severity of the error in the petition, the Court must admonish Cortez’s blatant negligence for failing to address such a glaring misstatement of fact attributed to him in the petition,” Derrick wrote.
The court also expressed discontent with the PFC in the ruling.
“The Court disapproves of the Programs Finance Committee’s relaxed and untimely attitude toward its duty to transcribe copies of the meeting in question,” according to the ruling.
— Parker Howell