The Student Judiciary heard the case of AFTER v. VandenLangenberg Sunday, concerning the charge that AFTER, a student group made up of student government members, intended to misuse student segregated fees by printing a political advertisement in the Badger Herald.
AFTER, the Associated Free Thinkers Ensuring Responsibility, placed an advertisement in the Badger Herald March 28 that encouraged students to vote against the United Council Membership Referendum, which keeps UW-Madison a member of the UW System lobbying group.
The student group planned for two similar advertisements in the newspaper at a total cost of approximately $2,400, but later withdrew its contract.
That is where the disagreement begins.
Kyle VandenLangenberg, shared governance chair of the Associated Students of Madison, alleges AFTER retracted the advertisements after they heard he was going to file a complaint against the group for the misuse of student segregated fees.
It is against ASM bylaws for candidates, initiative or referenda sponsors to use ASM resources, such as segregated fees, in campaigns without prior approval from Student Election Committee or Student Judiciary.
Member of AFTER and Finance Committee Chair Matt Beemsterboer said he never intended to use segregated fees to pay for the advertisements and AFTER has not yet received an invoice from the Badger Herald for the ad.
Private funds were going to be used for the advertisements, Beemsterboer said.
Beemsterboer said he pulled the other advertisements because multiple copies of the newspaper were destroyed the first day the advertisement ran in what he believes was a direct response the the ad's message.
ASM Representative and AFTER member Carl Fergus said the Student Judiciary cannot punish AFTER based on the speculation they intended to misuse segregated fees.
""No operations grant money was used and Student Judiciary cannot punish thought crime,"" Fergus said. ""No money was spent. No rules were broken.""
Current United Council Member and former Student Council member Maxwell Love said AFTER conspired to use segregated fees to unfairly influence the UC Referendum.
The petitioners argued that because members of AFTER are all part of student government, they knowingly violated the bylaws and neglected their duty to protect those laws.
""Public officials need to be held to a higher standard and be subject to public scrutiny,"" VandenLangenberg said. ""There is no transparency.""
The Student Judiciary will decide on AFTER's case within 10 school days.
