Parallels within UNC student government and state politics

As the state’s highest courts debate which ballots count for election, UNC’s student governance has found itself in strikingly similar circumstances. 

On Tuesday, the UNC Graduate and Professional Student Government voted to impeach the University’s Board of Elections. The impeachment will be reviewed in the Joint Governance Council on April 16. 

The decision to impeach comes after multiple Student Supreme Court cases around the recent student body elections. 

Tucker v. BOE

On March 29, the UNC SSC held a public trial in a case filed by GPSG presidential candidate Nyssa Tucker.

Tucker, who won 67 percent of the vote, was disqualified from the election by the BOE for submitting a campaign financial disclosure form more than an hour past the deadline.

Represented by UNC J.D. candidate Faisal Al-Alami and GPSG Senator Avery Baker, Tucker’s counsel argued the board’s decision was a “clear desecration” of its constitutional duty to uphold democratic elections. Al-Alami said that Tucker’s efforts to follow election procedures were hindered by the BOE’s administrative errors.

BOE Acting Chair Elias North said Tucker failed to seek clarification before the deadline, adding that their disqualification was a legal consequence, not voter disenfranchisement.

In their verdict released on March 31, the court ruled in favor of the BOE. The majority opinion stated that even a candidate who earned the majority of the vote must comply with election rules and deadlines. 

Unregulated powers of the BOE

The BOE has received eight formal complaints over the past two years, with concerns ranging from issues with campaign registration access, election transparency, early voting mismanagement and voter eligibility.

One key issue raised in Tucker v. BOE is the perception that the BOE holds unregulated power in its decision-making, particularly when interpreting and enforcing election laws. SSC Chief Justice Nathaniel Shue and Justice Andrew Gary addressed this in their commentary on the court's final opinion, despite concurring with the court’s per curiam opinion.

Gary wrote during the court's final opinion that he didn’t believe it was the court’s role to redefine the BOE. However, he also expressed concern that allowing the BOE to enforce the law without regulations could be “dangerous for our democracy.” 

This issue is not new. In 2017, SBP candidate Joe Nail was disqualified after his campaign received 12 penalty points, exceeding the 10 point limit. Nail appealed, saying the board applied inconsistent penalties compared to his opponent, who received only seven points despite similar violations. However, the SSC upheld the BOE's decision, citing its broad authority in awarding penalties.

In the same election cycle, sophomore Will Hopping filed an appeal claiming that the BOE exhibited bias toward a third SBP candidate. 

Hopping said that recordings submitted into evidence suggested the candidate received more favorable guidance from the acting BOE chair and student solicitor, potentially influencing the outcome of the election. His repeal was rejected by the court, which said that the BOE has the authority to provide procedural advice to candidates. 

Potential Recall Election 

On Thursday, a request for a GPSG presidential recall election was submitted to Darrius Barrow, director of UNC Student Life & Leadership. The petition contains 148 signatures. 

According to Title VII Section 6.000 of the GPSG code, a recall election can be initiated when a petition requesting such is submitted to the BOE. Frazier will continue to perform her presidential duties until the recall is complete.

Frazier commented on the potential for a recall election, saying that a recall election at this time could create instability and disrupt GPSG operations. 

“I remain fully committed to advocating for all graduate and professional students and welcome the opportunity to initiate with any constituents who have concerns,” Frazier said in a statement to The Daily Tar Heel. “I ask for the chance to prove that I will uplift your voices, prioritize transparency, and ensure that every student is heard.” 

Due to the BOE currently facing impeachment, a recall election cannot be approved until after next week’s JGC meeting. 

The design of the board as it stands now has been described by the Chief Justice of the SSC as having the “potential to lead to manifestly unfair outcomes that are also extremely difficult for a court to meaningfully strike down.”

“I humbly suggest you ask your representatives in student government’s legislative bodies to give serious thought to systemically reforming the Board of Elections,” Shue wrote. “It would not have been appropriate — or feasible — for us to entirely redefine the Board’s relationship with its mandate in this case. The legislatures should do this work, and do it with a sense of urgency.”

All BOE members are currently prohibited from performing their duties and a recall election cannot proceed without active members. If the impeachment fails in the JGC and/or the JGC confirms new members next week, the recall election will proceed.

CORRECTION: A previous version of this article misstated the conditions under which a recall election could proceed. The success of the BOE’s impeachment has no bearing on the recall election. The Daily Tar Heel apologizes for this error.

@calebherrera_

@dailytarheel | university@dailytarheel.com