The Judicial Council ruled in favor of second-year Black studies major Kamaya Jackson in the case of the Office of the Attorney General for Jackson versus 2024-25 Associated Students Internal Vice President and fourth-year art major Açucar Pinto on May 28. The case, heard on May 23, involved Pinto’s conduct during a March 5 closed-session Associated Students meeting, where the Senate tabled the appointment of Jackson to Student Commission on Racial Equity co-chair.

The Senate motioned to indefinitely table the appointment of Jackson as co-chair of S.C.O.R.E., which passed. Nexus file photo 

The Judicial Council (JC) handed down its decision, finding “clear evidence” in favor of the petitioner and against Pinto for two counts of Membership Rights violations as enumerated in Article IV of the Associated Students of the UC Santa Barbara (ASUCSB) Constitution, which states that all Associated Students (A.S.) members are entitled to “seek an elective ASUCSB office.” 

Former 2024-25 Attorney General (AG) and fourth-year chemistry major Eric Carlson represented Jackson and petitioned the case. The respondent, former Internal Vice President (IVP) Pinto, was not in attendance for the public hearing. 

In the original petition the AG claims Pinto’s conduct “constitutes abuse of power” which the JC did not find Pinto accountable for. 

Jackson, co-chair of the Black Women’s Health Collaborative (BWHC), sought to be appointed as a co-chair on the Student Commission on Racial Equity (S.C.O.R.E.) in winter quarter. Jackson said that she “really fell in love with the mission statement of unity and uniting people” of S.C.O.R.E. and aimed to expand the organization to more students of color as co-chair. 

During the closed session of the March 5 senate meeting, 2024-25 Senator and fourth-year political science major Paolo Brinderson motioned to indefinitely table the appointment of Jackson as co-chair of S.C.O.R.E., which passed. 

Prior to the senate meeting, Pinto sent messages in an Instagram group chat titled “Senate shenanigans” on Feb. 24 advising senate members not to approve Jackson’s appointment.  

Pinto’s message said that they had been involved in conversations with administration regarding the interpersonal conflicts within BWHC that “have not been going well” and that the “situation keeps escalating.” 

Pinto’s message continues, “I think it should take more time to handle the matter before approving the appointment, especially because this would mean that they [Jackson] are chairing two [Boards, Committees and Units (BCUs)], which is unusual to begin with, but not impossible, although this does make me question their capacity as chairing is no easy feat. We just want to ensure that matters are handled before moving on to accept their appointment later on in the following senate meeting.”

Pinto later deleted the message as they realized it was “an inappropriate platform” for the conversation, as not all senators were in the group chat and other members of A.S. who weren’t part of the Senate were in the group chat. 

“I was like okay let me recenter, regroup. I know I acted falsely and deleted the message,” Pinto said. 

The first reason Pinto advised against immediately passing Jackson’s appointment was concerns regarding the ability of one person to chair two different BCUs, student-led groups under A.S., which are funded by student fees.

Jackson says that her capacity to chair two different BCUs should not have been called into question during closed session, and believes it would never have been a concern if not for her race and gender. 

“My job, my occupation, my capacity was also put into question. That’s when there was a closed-door session, a meeting done by Senate to question my capacity. I want to emphasize that I do believe that this case wouldn’t have happened if [I] was another race or another gender,” Jackson said. 

The second reason Pinto advised to motion the tabling was alleged interpersonal conflicts between Jackson and her BWHC co-chair and second-year Black studies and feminist studies double major Kharys Ebert. Pinto alleged that several BWHC board members went to their office hours to raise concerns about behaviors within BWHC. 

“I had half of the BWHC board come into my office during office hours to report to me that there was language that could be seen as harassment. There was defamation of character. There was a lot of putting down other people’s efforts,” Pinto said. 

Pinto felt a need to try to assert themselves and mitigate these alleged conflicts within the BWHC. 

“We want people to leave here feeling empowered,” Pinto said. “We don’t want people leaving this organization feeling burnt out, like they didn’t get the things done that they so badly wanted to do, the services that they wanted to provide for the community.”

Jackson clarified that all conflicts within BWHC were being handled with Counseling & Psychological Services counselors, A.S. Executive Director Marisela Márquez and a student liaison. Jackson emphasized that any alleged interpersonal conflicts within BWHC should not have been involved in the decision to table her appointment. 

Pinto sent an email on Feb. 20 to several recipients, including Jackson, BWHC board members and former Student Advocate General (S.A.G.) and third-year computer science major Alvin Wang. Pinto raised concerns over a Policy 1 violation referencing the alleged interpersonal conflicts in BWHC and laid out a “restorative justice” plan which included a functional suspension of Jackson and Ebert, as well as the temporary substitution by Pinto and 2024-25 Senate Second President Pro Tempore and fourth-year Black studies major Alexa Butler. 

S.A.G. Wang responded stating, “IVP Pinto does not have the power to suspend or remove BCU chairs.” Wang also clarified in his testimony that Pinto had not formally filed a Policy 1 violation through the S.A.G office. The JC determined that Pinto was “overreaching their authority” by suspending Jackson, and the email “constitutes a public shaming” of Jackson, which violated her A.S. Membership Rights. 

Despite no S.A.G. investigation being put into motion, members of the Senate were under the impression from Pinto’s Feb. 20 email that an investigation was taking place, and therefore passed the motion to indefinitely table Jackson’s appointment. In an amicus brief to the JC, Brinderson writes that he “made the motion to table Jackson’s appointment principally because [he] was under the impression that there was an ongoing Office of the Student Advocate General investigation into her as a BWHC board member.” 

Since the motion to table Jackson’s appointment was explicitly influenced by an email with false information, the JC found that Jackson’s Membership Rights were violated by Pinto. 

In the original petition of the case, Carlson claims the indefinite tabling was an action “taken by the IVP out of a conflict of interest,” referencing a prior financial dispute between Jackson and Pinto.  

The BWHC commissioned the AtlantiQ Artist Collective to paint a mural of the late Executive Director of the Office of Black Student Development Elroy Pinks. Jackson alleged that Pinto and herself verbally agreed to a total of $300 as compensation early in winter quarter. In a text exchange on Feb. 3 between Jackson and Pinto, Pinto clarified that the compensation would be $200 for each artist who worked on the painting, adding up to $600 in total. 

According to Pinto, $300 was never the agreed-upon payment and an unexpected need for more materials led to an increased commission price. The texts to Jackson, provided by Pinto to the Nexus, state, “Originally we said $500 but because we’ve been running through a lot of our own material & I forgot to factor in varnish as well I thought $600 would make sense.” 

This financial dispute remains ongoing as the transaction has not been finalized. Jackson believes that this dispute was a motivating factor for the indefinite tabling of her appointment, along with members of the Senate not questioning the motion to table the appointment. 

“I do not think that the interpersonal conflict between me and my co-chair truly sparked this. I think the $600 dollars sparked a lot of this,” Jackson said. “But I also think IVP Pinto being able to get the ball rolling didn’t cause the snowball effect that we are seeing now. I think all the senators who approved this motion to table me indefinitely are also as much to blame for not questioning the process and just following blindly.”

Policy 15 of the ASUCSB Legal Code Standing Policies states that a conflict of interest can be for “personal financial gain.” However, since the JC did not have testimony that directly states that Pinto’s actions were motivated by the financial dispute, the claim that Pinto had violated Policy 15 would be speculative and could not be assigned to Pinto’s actions. 

With this decision, the JC directs the Senate to reopen the March 5 senate meeting minutes and add a motion to accept Jackson’s appointment as co-chair of S.C.O.R.E. The JC also instructs Pinto to write a public apology to Jackson acknowledging the two violations of her Membership Rights. 

The JC directives to the Senate were completed during the June 4 senate meeting. The Senate reopened the March 5 senate meeting minutes, added a motion to accept Jackson as S.C.O.R.E. co-chair and retroactively approved Jackson’s appointment. The Senate then approved the appointment of Jackson to S.C.O.R.E. co-chair from A.S. President and third-year global studies, communication and Spanish triple major Le Ahn Metzger for the 2025-26 academic year.