The Wisconsin Student Interest Group appealed to the student judiciary to receive funding after the Student Services Finance Committee denied the group's eligibility for 2011-2012 Tuesday.
The SSFC determined WISPIRG's ineligibility based on bylaws stating that at least 75 percent of an organization's direct service beneficiaries must be students.
SSFC members argued that WISPIRG did not meet this quota because the group's direct services applied to too many people outside the UW-Madison student population.
WISPIRG Chair Rashi Mangalick said the SSFC had interpreted WISPIRG's direct service definition in a non-viewpoint neutral way.
""I think it's pretty clear that the criteria being used right now are not objective and are being applied differently for different GSSF groups,"" WISPIRG secretary, Allie Gardner, said.
Gardner cited the Wisconsin Student Lobby as an example of a comparable student group who received funding despite providing similar services.
However, ASM Chair and SSFC defendant Tyler Junger said there was ""no correlation"" between the two because the WSL specifically defines its direct service as news and training services for students.
By contrast, Junger said WISPIRG failed to provide a clear definition of its direct services.
According to SSFC bylaw, if a group's direct service definition is ""vague,"" members may interpret it ""using a plain reading or a reasonable interpretation"" of their own, which may have worked to WISPIRG's disadvantage.
Junger said the SSFC had never interpreted the direct service criteria in WISPIRG's case as a body corporate.
""How is it that the SSFC could have committed a viewpoint neutrality violation in [this] case?"" Junger asked. ""Those two things do not add up.""
WISPIRG requested that its case be handed to ASM to ensure a ""just decision"" should the student judiciary rule in their favor based on viewpoint neutrality violation precedent.
The student judiciary will announce their ruling by Tuesday, Nov. 16.
