I must question Archana Chandrupatla’s Friday Jan. 22 article “GSB rules specialty seats constitutional for election.”

Debate within the senate is a healthy function. One issue that faces the senate every time it considers a bill is whether the bill would pass constitutional review.

The key here is whether the bill would pass constitutional review, not whether the bill is in fact constitutional.

The duty of determining the constitutionality of these bills lays with the GSB Supreme Court. If a student or group questions the constitutionality of a bill, a case is filed with the supreme court, not the senate.

She refers to graduate student Tricia Sandahl in her article. While she is a former chief justice pro tempore and her opinion, while valid, should hold no more influence over voting senators than any other opinion offered because she has no vote in the current supreme court.

She also stated that “GSB Vice President Jamal White made the final decision and did not rule the bill regarding specialty seats unconstitutional.” This statement is false and misleading.

The vice president is not able to make a decision determining the actual constitutionality of a bill, he may offer an opinion on the matter but is not the final authority.

I urge you to consider issues such as these prior to printing any further articles.

Robert Fink

Senior

Forestry and political science

GSB Supreme Court Chief Justice