The Student Association Supreme Court will not re-try the case of an SA adviser, although the court received 11 separate petitions requesting the hearing.

Sen. Dave Ivers sent the court petitions giving 11 reasons why he felt SA Community Affairs Adviser Brian Subatich’s appointment is not valid and charging that the entire June meeting, when Subatich was appointed, was illegal.

“I haven’t been happy with things since I got here,” Ivers said. “Things should get pretty exciting between now and Sunday.”

SA Supreme Court Chief Justice Ed Gil said Wednesday afternoon that the court would meet Wednesday night to decide if the case would be heard. However, Ivers, Subatich and others said they thought the case would not be heard. Gil refused further comment.

Ivers said Gil told him they would not re-try Subatich because of “res judicata”—the court has already heard the case—and double jeopardy, trying a person for the same offense twice, but which also requires a trial by jury.

Both charges are “totally bogus,” Ivers said. He said the move was the court’s attempt to “dodge the case. They rule and they regress without the power to do it.”

Subatich said he thinks Ivers’ move is to gain media attention because “so many people take him with a grain of salt. Dave Ivers is the only person creating a big fuss about internalities in the SA,” Subatich said. “I think the Supreme Court feels that, too.”

Newly-found Supreme Court bylaws, discovered in the SA archives Tuesday, are “pretty vague,” said Ivers. The court was “probably ruling illegally,” he said. Many senators might have joined Ivers in calling for the impeachment of some justices, he said.

Ivers called the court a “juracracy” since they have “direct review” of cases, adding he would not be quiet about the incident. “I’m not going to quit” discussing the earlier Subatich decision and rejection of his petitions, he said. “Everything the court does gives me more ammunition.”