73 Appeal What is the purpose of an Appeal from the Decision of the Chair? If a member disagrees with a decision of the chair, the member may ask that the assembly decide the question. In other words, an Appeal is the assembly’s or the member’s protection against the tyranny of or, in nearly all cases, an error by the chair (255–56). What rulings may be appealed? A decision by the presiding officer is generally subject to an Appeal. Remember, the chair’s reply to a Parliamentary Inquiry cannot be appealed. The reply is an opinion, not a ruling (259). There are three exceptions to the rule that all decisions by the chair may be appealed: 1. “if a point of order is raised while an appeal is pending, there is no appeal from the chair’s decision on this point of order” (256); 2. “when the chair rules on a question about which there cannot possibly be two reasonable opinions, an appeal would be dilatory and is not allowed” (256). 3. “no appeal can be made from a decision of the assembly itself” (254). This last exception applies to the situation in which the chair turns over a Point of Order to the assembly. (See “Point of Order,” page 72). When may an appeal be made? The Appeal must be made immediately, at the time of the ruling. If any debate or business has intervened, it is too late to appeal” (257). Is an Appeal from the decision of the chair debatable? Yes, usually. An Appeal is not debatable; however, if it “(a) relates to indecorum or a transgression of the rules of speaking; (b) relates to the priority of business; or (c) is made when an undebatable question is immediately pending or involved in the appeal” (257, 398). 74 Notes and Comments on Robert’s Rules What is the procedure for debating the motion to Appeal? Robert’s suggests the following: 1. The chair states the reasons for her ruling. 2. Each member is entitled to speak once. 3. The chair may again state her reasons or answer questions (257–58). Usually, the member who appeals from the decision states his reasons and the chair state her reasons. What is unique about the debate on the motion to Appeal? First, the motion to Appeal is the only motion in which the chair may enter into the debate without relinquishing the chair. (In addition , as stated on page 72, if the chair turns a Point of Order over to the assembly, the chair, as presiding officer, may enter into debate.) Second, a member may speak only once on an Appeal from the Decision of the Chair. The chair may speak twice (258). How should the Appeal be stated to the assembly for a vote? The chair should state, “The question is, ‘Shall the decision of the chair be sustained?’ Those in favor of sustaining the decision of the chair, say aye. Those opposed to sustaining the decision of the chair, say no.” (See the cue card example in “The Parliamentarian,” page 150.) A majority vote in the negative is required to overrule the chair’s decision. A tie vote sustains the decision of the chair (258). May the chair vote on an Appeal? Yes (258). May a member criticize a decision of the chair without making an Appeal? Not according to Robert’s. “Members have no right to criticize a ruling of the chair unless they appeal from his decision” (256).54 What limitation should apply to the use of the motion to Appeal? Although an Appeal is the motion through which all decisions ultimately reside in the majority will of the assembly, restraint should be exercised in the use of this motion. Robert’s states, “If a member [44.200.179.138] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 19:57 GMT) 75 Appeal disagrees with a ruling of the chair affecting any substantial question, he should not hesitate to Appeal. The situation is no more delicate than disagreeing with another member in debate” (258). The key term is “substantial,” for failing to exercise restraint with appeals can result in reducing the credibility of the chair, thereby weakening the organization. (See “Parliamentary Inquiry and Request for Information ,” page 90.) ...