University of Virginia Library

Council Rescinds
Allocation To SDS

By Barry Levine
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

Recognizing that the Students for a
Democratic Society can no longer use the
money for the intended purchases, the
Student Council Tuesday night unanimously
rescinded its disputed allocation
of $49 to the organization.

The motion, made by Ed Finch,
representative from the Law School,
"reaffirms the Council's continued belief
in the validity of its allocation to the SDS,
reaffirms its opposition to the Student
Activities Committee decision, and reaffirms
its position that the Council should
be solely responsible for allocating
student activities funds.

"Recognizing that SDS no longer
needs the funds," the motion continues,
"and in light of the fact that new allocations
are coming up at which time more clarity can
be obtained, the Council hereby rescinds its
allocation of $49 to SDS for the academic year
1969-70."

Educational Materials

The money had been appropriated last
semester to SDS to purchase "educational
materials on racism," but a temporary court
injunction by three law students contested the
allotment, claiming that SDS is "a politically-oriented
organization." The Student Activities
Committee does not allow student funds from
the Comprehensive Fee to be given to
politically-oriented groups.

However, the Council disagreed with the
classification, contending that since SDS was
not directly involved in electoral politics, it was
not politically-oriented.

Underlying the Council's stand was the
disputed definition of "politically-oriented
organizations," and student control of the
Comprehensive Fee.

All the students who were on the Council at
the time of the allotment were named in the
injunction. Attorney John Lowe, who represented
the representatives, reported Tuesday
night that the Council would have several
alternatives in the case as it stood then.

Politically-Oriented

He contended that the court "could not
properly dispose of the matter without the SAC
in the case," since the objection stemmed from
the SAC's definition of "politically-oriented."
He also said that the plaintiffs did not exhaust
the administrative remedies for preventing the
allocation, and that the students could have
sued for the appropriated funds if they felt it
was misappropriated, rather than petitioning for
an injunction.

In addition, the petition stated the "irreparable
harm" had been received, but, Mr. Lowe
contended, the damage had not been specified.

Mr. Lowe said that because SDS has since
revised its constitution, because the money is
no longer needed by the organization for the
original purchases, and because the Council has
elected new representatives in the interim, the
issue is clouded. He said that he feels the
Council had a "strong case," but, if the matter
was resolved in court with these conditions, "It
could set a bad precedent."

The real question, Mr. Lowe said, is "which
organizations are politically-oriented," in addition
to the issue of the distribution procedures
for student funds. There is an important issue,
he said, because "in a state university, if funds
are distributed, they must be distributed on a
non-discriminatory basis."