Members of the Wisconsin Student Public Interest Research Group are crossing their fingers until Student Judiciary makes its decision within the next 10 days on whether the group can re-apply for funding from student government.

WISPIRG appealed to the Student Judiciary, the branch of the Associated Students of Madison that oversees elections and resolves disputes between ASM and other parties, after being denied funding eligibility for the 2011-12 fiscal year in September by the Student Services Finance Committee.

At Tuesday night’s hearing, SSFC members defended their decision to deny the group funding, restating their belief that WISPIRG’s campaigns are too widespread and not directed toward students. WISPIRG members responded, arguing they are being unfairly punished for the success of their campaigns that affect not only students but also people on a statewide and national level.

WISPIRG, which supports largely green initiatives and trains its members how to advocate, received $128,378 for the 2010-11 fiscal year. If the Student Judiciary does not accept the organization’s appeal, the group could cease to exist on UW campus next year, according to WISPIRG Chair Rashi Mangalick.

“We have existed on this campus for over 20 years, and we have done lots of great work. Not receiving funding would be a huge loss to the campus,” Mangalick said.

SSFC denied the group funding after its eligibility hearing in September because it felt the primary recipients of WISPIRG’s services were not UW students.

According to an ASM bylaw, a student organization is only eligible for funding if 75 percent of the beneficiaries of that group are UW students. Furthermore, members of the committee felt WISPIRG’s direct service, which is to provide students with a forum to get involved in the political process, is too vague.

“A forum itself cannot be tailored to the needs of students. It is not a direct service; it is too abstract and cannot be construed as a specific and identifiable direct service,” said Tyler Junger, SSFC’s legal counsel.

However, WISPIRG Secretary Allie Gardner argued the organization’s programs provide advocacy training for students and clearly fit the definition of a direct service, since they are available to everyone on campus and can be tailored to students’ specific requests.

WISPIRG members felt SSFC’s decision was biased and that committee members created a new meaning for what the group’s services to the campus community actually are.

“The way that SSFC interpreted our direct services and the services we provide was not done in a viewpoint neutral manner. They redefined our direct service and interpreted it differently than they did with other groups,” Mangalick said.

Student Judiciary will now decide soon whether WISPIRG will be given the opportunity to re-apply for funding eligibility in front of ASM Student Council.

“We did not receive a fair and just trial in front of SSFC, and this case should now move to ASM student council instead off back to SSFC,” Mangalick said.

SSFC Chair Matt Manes said his committee is dedicated to making non-biased decisions based on the information they are provided with and said the committee made the right decision in denying them.