Student Supreme Court says no to disqualification appeal

Sophomore Joe Nail’s candidacy for student body president may not recover after the latest blow to his campaign late Tuesday.

Nail, who was disqualified by the UNC Board of Elections Monday, appealed that decision in the UNC Student Supreme Court Tuesday. The court announced its refusal to hear his appeal at 10:15 p.m. Tuesday.

The court’s two-page rejection said the Student Code gives the Board of Elections wide latitude in deciding how to punish candidates for campaign violations, which is all done through a point system.

“Though the Plaintiff may disagree with the Board’s determination of severity, the Board’s authority to determine severity and allocate points accordingly is firmly rooted in law,” the court’s order said.

The order comes just one day after Nail was disqualified by the BOE.

Harry Edwards, a member of the Nail campaign, said late Tuesday that the campaign isn’t sure what its next steps will be.

“I think it is very strange that they aren’t even willing to consider the possibility of wrongdoing by the Board of Elections,” Edwards said.

He called the court’s decision absolutely extraordinary and said there’s precedent for the court to modify decisions of the BOE.

“I think the main point is that the Supreme Court absolutely could have heard this appeal if they wanted to, the way it is written,” he said. “This could very much be that they just didn’t want to hear it.”

Paul Kushner, chairperson of the BOE, said he was glad to see that the court’s decisions showed the BOE was right. He said the court and the BOE did what they were supposed to do.

“Every time something like this comes up, you’re glad that your initial reasoning was upheld,” he said.

The election timeline, which schedules the general election for March 2, won’t be affected by this, Kushner said.

Edwards said he thinks the court may have not wanted to delay the elections any further by hearing the appeal. Elections were postponed by a two-week procedural freeze earlier this month.

The Nail campaign’s appeal provided the Student Supreme Court with eight reasons why the BOE had erred in disciplining Nail, and the court’s order decided those reasons weren’t enough to hear the appeal.

On Monday, the BOE found the Nail campaign guilty of a false start violation, a technology violation and a falsification violation. All the violations were brought up in a complaint from sophomore Katharine Shriver.

The appeal said Shriver’s complaint against the Nail campaign was missing necessary parts, such as an oath of honesty.

“ ... insufficient form is not sufficent grounds upon which to dismiss complaints in any judicial or quasi-judicial matter in student government, including hearings conducted by the Board of Elections,” the court’s order said.

The Nail campaign’s appeal also said the BOE was not consistent in awarding points, as the Nail campaign received more severe punishments for falsification and false start violations than the campaign of Matthew McKnight.

“I think that when you have a situation where two different candidates commit very, very similar offenses (and it) turns to very, very different punishment, I don’t think someone can argue with that,” Edwards said before the court’s order was released.

The court’s order does not mention the McKnight campaign, but it repeatedly describes the freedom the BOE has under the Student Code to distribute points as it sees fit.

The BOE will announce which candidates gained enough signatures to appear on the ballot on Thursday.

university@dailytarheel.com