Judicial Council
File a Petition for Review
The following page provides relevant rules, guidelines, and recommendations to consider when filing a petition for review with the Judicial Council. Please read this page to understand the filing process and ensure your petition is complete.
How to File
To file a petition for review, please complete the linked form. Petitions may also be filed by completing and returning this Word document, or by completing and returning this Google document. We recommend you request an Advocate to assist in writing the petition, confirming all procedural rules are appropriately followed, and ensuring your argument is as persuasive and compelling as possible.
Questions concerning the filing of a petition may also be directed to the Judicial Council President, at jcouncil@nd.edu.
What to File
The Judicial Council does not have jurisdiction to hear all cases, but instead has narrow and select appellate and original jurisdiction. The Judicial Council has appellate jurisdiction to hear appeals of the following decisions:
- Judgments issued by the Student Union Ethics Council.
- Judgments issued by the Election Council.
- Summary interpretations of Constitutional or statutory text.
The Judicial Council has original jurisdiction over the following cases:
- Cases involving significant questions of Constitution interpretation
- Cases in which a bylaw or statutory regulation (or the enforcement thereof) may be found unconstitutional.
Cases that deal with allegations of unconstitutional or unethical conduct within the Student Union must be directed to the Ethics Council, while cases that deal with allegations of unconstitutional or unethical conduct within elections must be directed to the Election Council.
What to include in Filing
If a petition is filed and granted, it shall become a brief. A brief is a written constitutional, statutory, or reasoned argument outlining each party’s argument. People or groups who are not directly involved in the case but have a strong interest in the outcome can file supplementary briefs.
Filing Rules
The Judicial Council is currently authoring and authorizing a set of procedural rules. Once approved, they will be publicly posted. Check back later for more details.
After Filing
A petition may be granted with the consent of two or more officers, or with the assent of the Judicial Council President. After filing, you will be informed whether your petition for review has been granted by the Judicial Council. If the Judicial Council does not grant your petition for review, prior decisions, if any, will stand.
If your petition is granted, the Judicial Council officers will review the arguments presented in brief format, and all assign an Advocate if one has not already been requested. Once the petition has been received, the date, time, and location for oral argument will also be scheduled.
Oral arguments are an opportunity for the Officers to directly question the Advocate(s) representing the parties to the case, and for the Advocate(s) to highlight arguments they view as particularly important. While parties to a case are advised to attend oral argument, presence is not required. Seating is available to the public on a first-come, first-seated basis.
After oral argument has concluded, the Judicial Council Officers will retire to a private forum for deliberation and consideration. This conference allows the Officers to deliberate and discuss important arguments and nuances concerning each case before the viewpoints held by each Officer are outlined in a written opinion.
Final Decision
Just before conference ends, each officer will submit a vote and explain their reasoning. Once the Judicial Council Officers have rendered a decision, the Judicial Council President shall subsequently assign the task of writing the opinion of the Judicial Council to an Officer in the majority and shall assign the task of writing the dissenting opinion to an Officer in the minority, if needed. Judicial Council Officers may additionally write concurring decisions. In the event of a tied vote, the holding supported by the Judicial Council President shall stand.
Judicial Council decisions are released in opinion form. These opinions issue binding resolution to the case at hand, may further include additional central holdings to resolve similar future cases, and contain the thorough rationale underpinning each Officer's reasoning. In extraordinary and time-sensitive cases, the Judicial Council may release the judgement without opinion before the release of a full opinion.
Opinions may be lengthy, technical, and detailed; but are written to explain the reasoning underpinning the decision, providing transparency and accountability by outlining the constitutional, statutory, or reasoned rationale used to reach their judgment. This style of reasoning in a public forum is crucial for ensuring the consistency and proper application of rules across the Student Union, while also allowing for future arguments to be based on the Council's reasoning.
Exceptions
In time-sensitive, unusual, or exceptional cases, the Judicial Council reserves the right to waive any rule not found explicitly in the Constitution. Rules waived may allow for the dispensation of oral argument, the early release of a draft opinion, the immediate release of a judgment without opinion, or any other procedural requirement. In unusual circumstances, the Judicial Council may also request more information, including reargument or rebriefing, or may take any other action in order for the proper, accurate, and timely dispensation of a case.
Common Q's & A's
Q: How do I ask the Judicial Council to hear a case?
A: You must file a petition for review.
Q: Can I have help filing a case?
A: Yes, you may request an Advocate—in fact, we actively recommend submitting this request so you can ensure your petition is strongly & correctly submitted. If you do not request an Advocate, you will nonetheless be assigned one if the Judicial Council grants your petition.
Q: How can my Advocate help?
A: Your Advocate can help write & file your petition, ensure your argument is as persuasive as possible, and coax out any relevant interpretive questions. They can conduct research, and offer guidance, explanation, and advice throughout the process. Lastly, your Advocate will argue your case before the Judicial Council and serve as the primary point of contact with the Officers.
Q: What cases can the Judicial Council hear?
A: Appeals of cases previously heard by either the Ethics Council or Election Council; appeals of summary interpretations issued by the Judicial Council President; cases involving questions of Constitution interpretation; or cases in which a bylaw or statutory regulation (or the enforcement thereof) may be found unconstitutional.
Q: Will the Judicial Council take my case?
A: The Judicial Council grants review by consent among two or more Officers or with the assent of the Judicial Council President. The Judicial Council does not hear all cases and may decline a case if improperly filed, not justiciable, inadequately substantive, or if without jurisdiction.
Q: How does the Judicial Council make decisions?
A: The Judicial Council reads briefs, inspects relevant precedent and history, examines applicable facts, listens to oral arguments, and collectively discusses cases in conferences. Once this process is complete, the six Judicial Council officers will vote and subsequently release written opinions.
Q: How do I read an opinion?
A: Opinions contain the holding and reasoning of the Judicial Council and include: the majority opinion, which is binding and expresses the decision and reasoning of the majority; any concurring opinions, which ultimately agree with the majority but express additional or differing reasoning; and any dissenting opinions, which express the minority view and contribute to public debate.
Q: May I appeal a Judicial Council opinion?
A: No, Judicial Council opinions cannot be appealed or reversed. The central holding of an opinion may only be invalidated by the release of a subsequent overturning opinion, or by constitutional amendment.