The wool has been tugged, but the eyes of the student body won’t cover that easily.
Wednesday four of your five Student Body Supreme Court justices voted to grant a runoff election to John Williams in his appeal of the Mr. FAMU election results.
The verdict reads: “At the moment the Electoral Commission admitted into public record, and formally notified Mr. Williams’ of the need for the runoff election, they ultimately began the precursor to fulfilling the promissory agreement…”
The justices used Black’s Law Dictionary’s definition of promissory estoppel to justify robbing Jeremy Mounticure of a title he won fair and square because accidentally telling Williams there would be a runoff and then recalling that erroneous announcement was to his “detriment.”
Yes, your justices would have you believe that Williams, who is also an associate justice of the traffic court, experienced loss and damage because of the less than 24 hours after the polls closed that he thought there would be a runoff.
Your justices, who are also members of the same law fraternity as Williams, would have you believe that the 52 percent of voters who chose Mounticure as their representative don’t matter.
But we know that you know better.
If the justices are so concerned about detriment to the parties involved, where is the concern for Mounticure?
He was officially declared Mr. FAMU nearly a month ago, only to have his title taken away and have to go through the campaign process all over again.
Justice should be blind and it should be fair.
The lone dissenter, Justice Justin Davis said it best in his statement: “Mr. Mounticure…won the position of Mr. FAMU in the initial election. As such, there are no grounds for said runoff election…”
His reason for dissent was Chapter 600.6 of the constitution.
The very same constitution that the Student Supreme Court is charged with interpreting and upholding.
We guess the law wasn’t enough to ensure justice this time.But if not now, when?
Robbyn Mitchell for the Editorial Board.