Former Associated Students presidential candidate and Senator Daniyal “Dan” Siddiqui’s request to have his counts appealed was denied by the Judicial Council on May 15. The council previously disqualified Siddiqui on May 12 for three counts of Membership Rights violations and one count of Abuse of Power.
The appeal response ended by noting that the announcement of the election validation results could alter the JC’s ability to change its remedy or verdict on the case. Nexus File Photo
On May 15, the Judicial Council (JC) denied third-year political science and philosophy double major Siddiqui’s appeal of its decision regarding the case petitioned by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG), and a request for an injunction, or halt, on the announcement of the Spring General Election results. The results were announced the same day the JC rejected Siddiqui’s appeal.
“The Council denies the appeal for a new hearing based on the grounds provided,” the appeal response read.
According to the appeal, Sidiqqui refuted allegations of “Membership Rights Violations in a similar sphere of jurisdiction as Abuse of Power.” He said Associated Students (A.S.) Legal Code clarifies that “abuse of power is understood to be the actions of knowingly overusing one’s power,” and he argues that placing limits on “anyone’s rights is a different, and arguably lower, threshold than evidence of ‘overuse’ of one’s power.”
In the original JC decision, the council argued that Siddiqui “threatened” Senator, former JC member and fourth-year political science and economics double major MingJun Zha to prevent him from passing a motion to direct the Elections Board to extend the write-in choice candidacy deadline. The JC referred to text messages sent to Zha by Siddiqui during the April 9 senate meeting, which said, “There will be repercussions from what you’re doing.” Siddiqui previously told the Nexus that he was referring to interpersonal relationships between senators.
“The scope of how one member may limit another’s ‘participation in activities’ is vastly different from how one member may overuse their power,” Siddiqui’s appeal letter read.
The appeal response from the JC said the council drew a parallel between the Membership Rights and Abuse of Power violations, in reference to the messages sent from Siddiqui to Zha. The JC considers encroachment of the “responsibilities of another” and “limiting” anyone’s rights comparable, and therefore is not overturning the charge.
The JC found that, since Zha voted against his own motion to extend the choice candidacy deadline and approached the Student Advocate General and OAG with concerns over Siddiqui, there is “clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Zha’s participation within Associated Students was limited by Senator Siddiqui’s message.”
The first count of membership violations against Siddiqui concerns an Oct. 9 senate meeting in which third-year computer science major Ephraim Shalunov was “voluntarily subjected” to an unofficial hearing during his appointment to chair of the A.S. Jewish Commission. Siddiqui chaired the meeting as first president pro tempore, which is his responsibility when the Internal Vice President (IVP) is unable to. The case opinion alleges that Shalunov was “treated differently from any other AS member nominated to a chairship.”
The hearing was later struck from the senate record for violating Title VI, or “discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance,” the Civil Rights Act, UCSB Student Conduct Code and Senate Standing Policies and Procedures, among others.
In the appeal, Siddiqui argued that he did not organize the hearing or treat him differently during the appointment process, saying that he “allowed” Shalunov to present his case and arguments “as he requested to.”
The JC found that “Siddiqui’s behavior of Membership Rights violations has been an exhibited pattern since October” and holds its original decision on that count.
The second count is in regard to a group chat where several senators partook in deliberations in which other senators were “excluded,” which Siddiqui is asking the JC to “reconsider” as he was not “solely responsible.” The JC maintains that while Siddiqui is not “solely responsible” for the group chat, he “participated in and facilitated” the violation of Membership Rights for other senators.
“The information provided within this appeal was insufficient to vindicate the challenged charges or warrant an appellate hearing,” the appeal response concluded.
The JC also noted that, as the sole judiciary body within A.S.’s Judicial Branch, further appeals can be submitted. The appeal response ended by noting that the announcement of the election validation results could alter the JC’s ability to change its remedy or verdict on the case.
In a statement sent to the Nexus, Siddiqui said the decision of the JC “rests on speculative interpretations” and had to invent a “new legal framework” to prosecute him. He believes the framework was created with the intent of disqualifying him, and alleged conflicts of interest within parties responsible for adjudicating the case.
JC Chair and fourth-year political science major Krishna Thaker did not respond to questions regarding specific conflicts of interests, but noted “any Council Member with an explicit personal gain” is “legally bound to recuse themselves from it.” She also noted any actions conducted outside of one’s role as a Council Member “should be considered individual actions.”
“Any members of the Association who feel that a Conflict of Interest impacted any of The Council’s decisions are within their right to submit an appeal on those grounds,” Thaker said in an email statement sent to the Nexus.
According to documentation obtained by the Nexus, JC member and third-year political science and philosophy double major Josie Penix, who co-wrote the original JC decision and was the sole author of the appeal response, sent pictures of third-year global studies, communication and Spanish triple major Le Anh Metzger’s presidential campaign poster boards to a Gamma Phi Beta group chat.
According to the anonymous source that provided the documentation, Penix said that she couldn’t publicly discuss her thoughts on the candidates at a Gamma Phi Beta meeting, and at a later date, on May 5, she sent the photo of the poster. Siddiqui argued that Penix should have been excluded from having a role in adjudicating his case.
Penix denied a request for comment.
Siddiqui claimed that fourth-year chemistry major Eric Carlson has had a “consistent pattern” of weaponizing his power to “achieve his political aims.” He said that during the June 5, 2024 senate meeting, Carlson gave a report suggesting Siddiqui’s appointment as first president pro tempore was illegal, which Senator and fourth-year sociology major Jasmine Amin also claimed at the Oct. 9, 2024 senate meeting.
Carlson did not respond to requests for comment.
“[Attorney General] Carlson has been engaged in a long-term effort to bar me from holding office in Associated Students in any capacity, solely due to his personal and political disagreements with myself,” Siddiqui said in the statement.
He mentioned that Carlson and A.S. President and political science and sociology double major Nayali Broadway publicly endorsed Metzger in the A.S. Elections supplement.
“If a conflict of interest policy was being enforced by the [Attorney General], it would have barred the President and [Attorney General] themselves from any involvement in the case due to them having a clear interest in my disqualification due to endorsing my opponent,” the statement read.
Siddiqui also mentioned that 2023-24 A.S. President Tessa Veksler posted a public endorsement of Metzger via an Instagram story on May 15. He said the JC’s decision demonstrated “clear bias” due to a lack of penalties for incoming IVP and third-year history and global studies double major Enri Lala, who faced “similar charges to [himself],” claiming it is “effectively shaping [A.S.] leadership to fit Veksler’s endorsements.”
The AG also adjudicated a case petitioned by Carlson against Lala, alleging he participated in electoral interference by “convincing his opponents to drop out of this race for executive office,” and using the legislative institution and privileged information to prevent candidates from running against him. Lala was not disqualified from running for IVP in the A.S. General Election.
“The student body deserves to be aware of this, and the extent of conflicts of interest and lack of procedural fairness in deciding my case,” Siddiqui’s statement concluded.
A version of this article appeared on p. 3 of the May 22, 2025 print edition of the Daily Nexus.
So a presidential candidate has violated the constitution multiple times, and the JC is therefore arguing he should be ineligible to hold office? Sounds like they’re doing their job. The term “conflict of interest” gets used very generously in this article… never is it stated what said conflicts actually are. Never is it stated what anyone on the JC may stand to gain from another candidate winning. Also, your lede is written in passive voice.
Title