The following is a collection of documents related to the ASUW judicial decision that Dean of Students Sean Blackburn decided to strike from the record. Proceeding each document will be a short explanation of the document, how it relates to the case and, if necessary, some quotes and information pulled from the document.
Read our earlier story regarding Blackburn’s decision here.
We encourage you to read each document in its entirety. These are lengthy documents, but a thorough reading of these documents is the best way to get a fully informed opinion.
Excerpts are included only to provide readers with an idea of the contents of the documents and should not be taken to represent the documents in their entirety
The ASUW Judicial Decision
The following is the ASUW Judicial Councils decision regarding the conduct of former ASUW President Brian Schueler and Vice-President Emily Kath.
It includes the following:
- The Judicial Council’s Decision
- Concurrence regarding that decision
- Dissent from Associate Justice Richard Yang
Here are some important points from the document:
General Conduct of Involved Parties:
- Judicial Council was disappointed with a perceived “lack of professionalism” with all parties involved.
Status of Intefraternity and Panhellenic Councils:
- Judicial Council condemns “the act of interpreting the By-Laws of the ASUW by the Executive branch. Interpretation of our working documents is a right that is only granted to the Council.”
- “Politics masquerading as justice undermines confidence in the government and must not be tolerated.”
Order:
- The judicial council remanded “the vote by IFC and PHC to the individual and respictive Board’s of the Interfraternity and Panhellenic Councils,”
Concurrence:
- “This email contained confidential student information and the email was requested to be sent only to the Acting Chief Justice. By subverting this email to the Executive Branch (at the behest of Vice President Kath), this allowed the Executive Branch to get a jump-start on the defensive had there been tampering with timestamps on emails submitted by President Schueler. This again underscores the lack of professionalism, and is conduct unbecoming of Vice President Kath and President Schueler.”
- “The actions taken by Vice President Kath and President Schueler are far outside any normal working protocol in any professional environment.”
- “Had the JC had a better-outlined metric to evaluate ethical behavior in our working documents, we would not hesitate to levy sanctions against President Schueler and Vice President Kath, up to and including impeachment.”
Dissenting Opinion:
- “The JC should not hold any point of view and express tendentiousness on matters of ethical conduct.”
- “we should be working together and finding a common ground rather than attacking or complaining about each other.”
Blackburn’s response to Schueler and Kath’s appeal of the decision
This is a letter to Schueler and Kath from Blackburn informing them of his decision to strike the decision from the record.
Judicial Council Injunction
The Judicial Council decided to file an injunction against a few bills until the council reached a decision.
Senate Bill 2489
Addendum C is the addendum submitted by Schueler and Kath, which was ultimately removed. The addendum was held procedurally inappropriate by the Judicial Council.
Daniel Kerb’s Letter
Daniel Kerbs, a former senator, in this letter strongly condemns the actions of Schueler and Kath related to addendum C, claiming that Schueler defamed his character.
- “The President stated these emails were related to fraud. At the Budget and Planning meeting on February 25, 2016, the President reaffirmed his assertion that the rational for IFC and CPH becoming RSOs was to avoid releasing aforementioned emails. Combined with the fact that the letter in Senate Bill #2489 Addendum C specifically names myself and implies I was the only student associated with IFC involved in the decision, and both the President’s letter and public statements suggest I made the decision in order to prevent information pertaining to a “justified public records request” from being released, the President has publically insinuated that I acted in order to conceal a case of fraud.”
- “In addition to being inaccurate, the President’s actions have cast doubt on IFC and CPH as legitimate organizations and made my own character the victim of the court of a misinformed public opinion. Through the public distribution of the letter and statements made in a public meeting, the President has caused fellow students to doubt my motives and my integrity, has placed my reputation in a position of vulnerability, and endangered my goals of a prosperous future.”
Emails between former Chief Justice Susan Manown and Schueler
The following emails between Schueler and Manown discuss the status of IFC.
Question about RSOs also being Programs
The decision to release these documents was reached by the BI’s Editorial Board after significant deliberation.
Contact us if you have any concerns by emailing the following editors:
Thomas Garvie
News Editor
tgarvie@uwyo.edu
Matt Fabian
Editor-in-Chief
mfabian1@uwyo.edu
