The Student Government Association’s Elections Court found the Davis.Hunter campaign responsible for malicious campaigning.
The Mullins.Martin campaign claimed the Davis.Hunter campaign violated Article III, Section X of the constitution which states, “Candidates and their staff may not use campaigning which is or can be construed as slander, libel or statements with malicious intent.”
A Davis.Hunter campaign worker posted the statement on Instagram which stated “there are people in SGA…wasting everyone’s time trying to take money away from students who are putting in work to make our university better…”
The Davis.Hunter campaign’s Instagram reposted the statement.
The elections court said that the statement “could have been construed to imply that other campaigns do engage in those situations while the one she supports does not.” The court also found “there was no specific malicious intent.”
“With everything that’s going on in the world, there’s really no place for negativity or malicious behavior towards other people,” Devin Mullins, student body presidential candidate, said in a statement. “There’s so much happening for so many people right now, and I applaud the E-Court for making sure that the election doesn’t become another source of anxiety.”
Mullins also said that malicious campaigning is a “poor way” to spread a message and ultimately reflects back on the campaign being run.
Gaby Romero, the Davis.Hunter campaign worker who posted the comment, sent the following statement to The Appalachian: