ASUO President Emma Kallaway has responded to former rival Michelle Haley’s grievance against her with this 23-page petition. Here’s the plum quote:
(T)his petition for review is a malicious attempt to remove Respondent after no wrongdoing, most likely as a result of Respondent defeating Petitioner in the 2009 ASUO General Election.
Kallaway has a response to each of Haley’s arguments inside. She questions the applicability of Haley’s citations, and so forth, but the argument against Haley’s first point — that Haley’s complaining about her criteria for fulfillment of duties is a moot point because she’s already published them — is the most intriguing, and seems to be a dangerous beast in legal or quasi-legal argument: an appeal to simple common sense. There are other gems inside, too. Expect a longer article tommorow, when it becomes reasonable for me to press copy editors into service again.
I thought Kallaway’s response was well-written (with the exception of a few grammatical errors); I liked that most of her response was factually-supported and that she cited previous Court rulings to emphasize her arguments. The funny thing is that Haley already stated she didn’t expect to actually impeach Kallaway, but that she wanted to bring her “dirty laundry” to light – so isn’t this entire grievance moot? Gower and Diamond had already brought to light that she hadn’t sent out her list of goals… and, really, if she wanted to bash Kallaway so publicly, she probably could’ve just talked to the ODE and gotten some kind of blurb written. The executive has more important things to worry about than a moot grievance.