It is good to see the Student Association’s Supreme Court show concern for students’ representation in government. But their decision to disband the entire legislative branch of government is premature and a disservice to the students that government is supposed to serve.

The Supreme Court decided rightly that the current districting system, on and off campus, does not adequately represent students because it is too easy to elect special interest groups. But what the court forgot is that poor representation is better than no representation.

American government is built on the philosophy of checks and balances. Each of the three branches monitor and balance what the others do. But the SA’s judicial branch has eliminated the entire legislative branch and thus removed an important balance in the SA.

Sure, there will be another election in a few weeks. But students thought they had duly elected representatives for them. And surely those who voted must feel disenfranchised to find that their votes last week were meaningless. That they are left with no effective representation until another election is held. An executive branch alone cannot adequately represent the student body.

The court’s action is certain to set back the SA. Several student organizations rely on student government to receive the funds they need to continue operating. Yet the SA’s finance committee cannot meet until there is a new senate. At the very least, it will mean the finance committee will be pressured to review budgets more quickly, and it could delay funding for organizations.

A student government needs adequate representation and should not be in the hands of special interest groups. But the answer is not the disbanding of a senate that already has been elected as the representatives of the student body. The answer is to mandate that future elections follow the constitution.

That would have enabled the legislators to develop an equitable way to redistrict for the next election, and it would have kept government operating in a crucial budgeting time.

But most important, it would have served the interests of students who also have a constitutional right to representation in the legislature.