Troy Caldwell’s name will appear on Student Association ballots for president, according to an SA Supreme Court ruling Friday night.

The court upheld an appeal by Caldwell, an SA presidential candidate and the current treasurer, who protested a ruling by the Board of Elections kicking him out of the race last week for allegedly fraudulent petitions.

Efforts Sunday to obtain a copy of the Supreme Court ruling and reach Chief Justice Alan Smith were unsuccessful.

Caldwell said he’s happy the appeals are over.

“It’s obvious by the Supreme Court ruling that I did no wrong,” Caldwell said. “Now we can get back to the real issues, student issues.”

On Tuesday, the board claimed Caldwell violated the SA elections policy when he whited out the names on potential running mates’ petitions and used their signatures toward the 400 he needed for his own candidacy. Those signatures included double names and people who never signed for Caldwell, the board maintained.

Criticism has come quickly over how the Supreme Court handled the case. Sen. Jeff Meyer, a Board of Elections member, said the board did not learn of the Supreme Court case until it was too late to prepare a defense.

According to the SA elections policy, all appeals must be in writing and directed to the chief justice, who must promptly notify the board chairman, the election commissioner, all other relevant parties and all other justices.

The board was not notified of the appeal, and therefore the board did its own research, Meyer said.

“A day after the appeal was made, Emiko Pope (the board chairwoman) and I went to the SA office to see if an appeal was made, and there we got a copy of it,” he said.

According to policy, the Supreme Court must hear and rule on any appeal within two days, except on election days. Meyer said he filed for a continuance for more time because the Board of Elections was not promptly notified of the appeal.

“My motion was denied by chief justice Alan Smith on the basis that the Supreme Court must rule in 48 hours,” he said.

At the Supreme Court hearing, all parties were to present the court with documents they intended to use. There, Caldwell’s side presented a different copy of the appeal than what had originally been presented earlier in the week, Meyers alleged.

In the first appeal, Caldwell lists three points in which he disagrees with the Board of Elections:

— the board’s alleged hampering of his ability to prepare a proper defense.

— the board’s alleged failure to follow a policy requirement to “hear any rule on any appeal within two days.”

— the board alleged failure to file his appeal within 24 hours of the decision of the election commissioner.

In the appeal handed out at the hearing, four points were made, doubling the amount of text in the appeal, and Caldwell added that the ruling to remove him from the ballot was “arbitrary and biased.”

Meyer said he moved for a second postponement of the hearing, this time in front of the entire board, but again was denied.

“I was given a five-minute recess to formulate a defense to the additional points in the appeal,” he said. “The higher court in this case is holding the lower court, the Board of Elections, to a higher standard of law than they’re holding themselves.”