This is a developing story and will be updated as additional information becomes available.
Editor’s Note: Alifa Chowdhury is a former Daily staffer. Chowdhury did not contribute to this article.
The University of Michigan Central Student Judiciary — the judicial branch of the Central Student Government — upheld the results of the 2024 CSG elections in an opinion released Sunday evening. The decision confirms LSA junior Alifa Chowdhury and LSA sophomore Elias Atkinson as the next CSG president and vice president, respectively, along with the 22 SHUT IT DOWN Assembly candidates who were projected to win their elections.
MomentUM, a CSG political party, filed a lawsuit with CSJ on April 2 alleging the SHUT IT DOWN party violated the CSG Elections Code during their campaign, including allegedly campaigning within 100 feet of an election information location. The judges concluded the plaintiffs’ evidence — including videos provided by MomentUM — was insufficient.
“While chants of ‘divest’ are clearly audible in the footage, moreover, the protestors do not appear to be saying ‘shut it down,’” the Court wrote in the judgment. “And although we know from the sole defendant to testify that ‘shut it down’ was in fact chanted somewhere in the Union, the record does not reveal where.”
The plaintiffs also alleged the defense obscured several United for Michigan and MomentUM posters in Mason Hall, providing photographic and video evidence.
The Court also wrote that the evidence for the plaintiffs’ argument on campaign poster obstruction was insufficient. The plaintiffs originally alleged that SHUT IT DOWN failed to include identification on campaign materials, which is a requirement outlined in CSG’s Compiled Code, a governing document that defines the logistics for all branches of the student government, including elections.
“To prove the violations, the plaintiffs must show that the defendants or their campaign teams produced or placed the specific posters that lacked a ‘paid for by’ identification, placed the specific posters that purportedly obscured or obstructed MomentUM and United’s posters, and moved the specific MomentUM poster that was allegedly relocated,” the Court wrote. “Without that kind of evidence proving each essential element of the claims, we cannot conclude that the defendants or their campaign team members engaged in the prohibited conduct.”
In their conclusion, the justices wrote they hoped many would welcome the decision made.
“Perhaps those who flung far-fetched accusations hoped we would surrender to pressure,” the Court wrote. “There is no world in which they would have succeeded. Had our best reading of the evidence and the governing documents pointed us in a different direction, we would have rendered a different decision. Many will surely welcome today’s decision; others will surely be disappointed. But both sides should appreciate that it was a fair fight.”
Daily News Editor Ji Hoon Choi can be reached at jicho@umich.edu.