A federal judge denied a preliminary injunction Tuesday filed by a University of Wisconsin student group that believes it was unfairly denied funding.
Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow claimed their request for funding from Student Service Finance Committee was denied for the 2009-10 academic year because SSFC did not agree with their viewpoint as a conservative group. They based this claim on the fact Wisconsin Student Public Interest Research Group, a liberal student advocacy group, was granted funding.
CFACT asserts they offer the same direct service as WISPIRG and applied for funding following the blueprints used by WISPIRG, yet WISPIRG was rewarded funding while CFACT was not, United States District Judge Lynn Adelman said in a decision.
SSFC Chair Brandon Williams said CFACT was denied funding in 2008 because the organization did not dedicate more than 50 percent of their time on direct services to the campus community, falling short of the criteria required by Associated Students of Madison bylaws.
He said CFACT was denied again this year because it still did not meet the direct service criteria.
“Three or four other groups were denied because they also did not provide enough direct service,” Williams said, adding he absolutely believes CFACT was treated fairly.
CFACT appealed the 2008 ruling to SSFC, Student Judiciary and Chancellor Biddy Martin. After all parties denied the appeal, CFACT filed to sue ASM and the other various UW parties who rejected them.
Adelman said there are three criteria for this primary injunction to be accepted. CFACT must prove SSFC caused them irreparable harm by denying their funds, as they have no other legal recourse and their claim has some chance of succeeding in the legal system.
CFACT would have to demonstrate its application was denied because of a breaking of viewpoint neutrality, Adelman added.
While Adelman said the denial of SSFC funds subjects CFACT to irreparable harm — without these funds, the CFACT budget will drop from the previous budget of $170,000 to $8,300. He does not believe SSFC violated viewpoint neutrality in its decision to reject funding for CFACT; because they did not meet the third criteria, he could not accept their claim.
He added WISPIRG received funding while CFACT did not because their application was complete, not because SSFC was politically biased.
“WISPIRG timely turned in a complete eligibility application, whereas CFACT did not,” Adelman said. “CFACT’s failure to timely submit a complete application would be a viewpoint neutral justification for denying eligibility to CFACT but granting it to WISPIRG.”
CFACT Director Christian Wilson had no comment on the future action the organization would take.
“All I can tell you is CFACT continues to provide a service to UW students and is a loud voice for free market environmentalism,” Wilson said in an e-mail to The Badger Herald.
CFACT will continue to have access to current office space, but they will have to return any office equipment purchased with past funds to SSFC.
