Removing Spurious Removal Hearings, & Removing Spurious Spuriousness

   In the spirit of the Impeachment Fever that has been sweeping through society of late, I have decided to propose a solution. It will be discussed in Internal Affairs Commission tomorrow (Monday 11/13)(at 5pm, MU Garrison Rm). The only problem, despite the fact that the background section is only two paragraphs long, I can't seem to get it to look right. Specifically, I can't seem to find a satisfactory replacement for the word "spurious." I do like the word, but it found its way into just about every sentence and the harder I try to get it out the more entangled it gets.

   So help me fix this problem. The current Background of the proposed bill reads:

   In order for the Judicial Branch to function properly, it must be protected from political influence. A major threat to this is the prospect of justices being removed over political disputes. Over the last four years there have been impeachments (removal hearings) against ASUCD Justices directly following unpopular court decisions at an average rate of once a year. This also occurs at other schools with similar student governments. Sometimes, however, there are legitimate reasons to impeach Justices, such as failure to attend meetings. The Bylaws should seek to allow impeachments for legitimate reasons while protecting the judiciary from those that are spurious.
   The Internal Affairs Commission currently reviews legislation submitted to the Senate and vets out that which is spurious. Spurious removal hearings however are significantly more troublesome than spurious legislation, being inevitably accompanied by more drama, stress, and a significant disruption of the meeting by having a closed session. It therefore is in keeping with the IAC’s existent duties, and in the interest of the ASUCD Senate, to have the IAC eliminate spurious impeachments.

   ...And the answer is indictment! (First link is the actual Bill, second is the changes in context. Underlines are additions.) And you thought the ICC "Confirmation of Charges" hearing last week was unrelated didn't you.

   Unfortunately alternative synonyms such as superfluous and specious still sound enough like "spurious" that it still sounds weird, and everything else I've thought of has a subtly different meaning. Extra points if you can work in schmaltzy (fatty, unnecessary), contravention, or some other saucy word.


Meanwhile at ASUC Berkeley
The illustrious Beetlebeat continues to provide insightful coverage of the impeachment of Chief Justice Banerjee.

Legal Definitions

Terrorism, Imprisonment, & Battery - A Typical Week in ASUCD
   So the California Aggie ran their story today on last week's ASUCD antics, and I really must congratulate them on upping the drama ante: Apparently last week's ASUCD adventures included terrorist threats, unlawful imprisonment, & battery!!! Either Comptroller Kai (pictured) or Senate Candidate Peake could be subject to up to a year jail time!

   The Aggie also had an incredibly short article on the ASUCD Candidates Forum last Wednesday. Interestingly though:

   Rob Roy, an independent candidate, said he would not name all the ASUCD commissions, a question posed to him by the event's moderator.
   "I can name all the commissions that you're asking, but I'm not going to," he said. "Let's talk about what we need on campus."
   For his closing statement, Roy leapt over the table, seized the microphone, and paced back and forth as he decried LEAD and Student Focus slates for being too dominating of the ASUCD elections.

Burritos vs Sandwiches
   In other news, the delightful Kristy Heidenberger has brought it to my attention that a Massachusetts Superior Court has found that burritos are not sandwichs. Judge Locke described burritos as "typically made with a single tortilla and stuffed with a choice filling of meat, rice, and beans," (and offered at low low prices!).


Related

United States Supreme Court finds that tomatoes are actually vegetables rather than fruit. (When appointed to the US Supreme Court I intend to overturn this ridiculous example of judicial activism!!)

Are hamburgers sandwiches? Are pizzas pies? Emosnail polls!