The ASUO Constitution Court made two ballot-related decisions that would be a part of the ASUO spring elections. The ballot proposals came from UO Divest and OSPIRG.

The first ruling dealt with UO Divest’s ballot proposal which asked if the UO should “sell its investments in fossil fuel extraction companies and use its power, connections and influences to address the issue of climate change,” according to the student group’s ballot proposal.

The first draft of the proposal was denied by the court due to the language not being objective enough and  language that could possibly influence voters. Upon the revised ballot proposal, the court decided that the language was objective and that it could be approved to be on the spring elections ballot.

OSPIRG proposed two ballots that dealt with financing the group so that they would be able to hire professional staffers that could conduct research and that would be presented to decision makers in Salem and Washington D.C. One of the ballots also asked if there was support for OSPIRG to be funded at $1.60 per student per term indefinitely. The $1.60 would be to help fund the organization as well as hiring a professional staffer.

The court unanimously decided not to make a decision on the to ballot proposals since they would have to implicate federal law into the decision since the ballots dealt with direct funding.

“Matters that implicate state and federal law are outside of the Court’s purview, and thus, this Court will not hear such matters,” the court wrote in its decision review. “Given that the proposed OSPIRG ballot measures and constitutional amendment implicate U.S. federal law, the court hereby formally refers these four measures to the University Administration and those who rule upon legal matters regarding the university.”