The Daily Tar Heel
Printing news. Raising hell. Since 1893.
Saturday, May 4, 2024 Newsletters Latest print issue

We keep you informed.

Help us keep going. Donate Today.
The Daily Tar Heel

Everyone wants the election to be over, but not until there is real resolution to Santoro’s suit

It would be incredibly fortunate for Andrew Phillips if the case against him, and his dismal interpretation of the Student Code, is dismissed tonight.

But it shouldn’t happen. The suit needs to go forward, and plaintiff Deanna Santoro has the standing for it to do so.

Almost everyone wants this election to be over. And it would be great to know the results. But more important for the integrity of the Code and for student government would be genuine resolution to the Board of Elections’ mishandling.

Tonight’s hearing is to weigh Phillips’ argument that Santoro lacks the proper authorization in the Code to bring a suit against him.

Phillips is getting it wrong.

While the relevant sections regarding ability to sue are more nuanced than the sections he is alleged of violating, his motion to dismiss is just as inexcusably wrong as the decisions he is being sued over.

He writes that Santoro doesn’t meet the criteria for being adversely affected by the BOE’s failure to force Ian Lee to resign from his executive position before running for president.

His motion states that her injury from resigning as speaker, which Santoro had to do in order to sue, stemmed from her “willful action.” Not from the shoddy work by the BOE that drove her decision.

He also states that the complaint was not filed within the 96-hour window to challenge a BOE decision.

We don’t buy any of these arguments, and the Student Supreme Court shouldn’t buy them either.

The BOE’s decision to allow Ian Lee to run facilitated a conflict of interest situation, whereby Lee was in charge of updating the Code.

That affected Santoro directly and adversely as she was speaker of Student Congress, and resigning was the only way she could challenge the decision.

With respect to the statute of limitations, we direct Phillips to the definitions in the Code — they can be helpful. It defines “act” to include a “refusal to act.”

And it was Phillips’ refusal to act that makes up a large part of Santoro’s complaint.

If the BOE thinks it avoids culpability by refusing to investigate violations, it seems sorely mistaken.

To get the day's news and headlines in your inbox each morning, sign up for our email newsletters.