In a Jan. 25 decision, the Student Association Judicial Board struck down a clause banning joint campaigning in SA elections from the Election Transparency and Equality Act.

Passed last December, the Election Transparency and Equality Act amended the SA Constitution and Management Policies to implement universal campaign rules, including a ban on joint campaigning. While the J-Board in January upheld most of the legislation, it unanimously struck down a clause that prohibited joint campaigning. The ruling was similar to its Nov. 20 decision that approved the 2025-2026 Elections Code while also striking down a similar ban.

Both decisions said the prohibition violated Article I, Section F “Free Speech” Clause of the SA Constitution.

“The Judicial Board finds that this absolute prohibition on joint campaigning is neither narrowly tailored nor the least restrictive means to achieve the observable SA interest,” it wrote in the Nov. 20 decision. “Instead, as a ban on all forms of joint campaigning, it is overly broad and encroaches not only upon the right of candidates to freely express their views, but also upon their right to associate with one another.”

In the November decision, the J-Board noted that while the SA intended to “provide greater equity in the electoral process,” the language used by the SA Congress was too broad and unnecessary to achieve this goal, infringing on a right to free speech protected by the SA Constitution.

The Election Transparency and Equality Act and 2025-2026 Elections Code define joint campaigning as “two or more candidates that coordinate their advertising, platform, and other electoral activities.”

Jacob Taichman-Bernstein, a representative from Hinman College who co-authored the legislation and a freshman majoring in philosophy, politics and law, explained that he originally wrote the act to address “inconsistent standards” in the congressional elections.

“To me, the most important part of this ruling is what is preserved,” wrote Taichman-Bernstein in an email to Pipe Dream. “The Judicial Board passed the Election Transparency and Equality Act. The changes that matter most are now in effect: a single election day, clear and equal campaign rules, and a transparent results process. I’m proud of what this legislation does, especially for first-time candidates who previously had no idea what the rules even were.”

“I am also glad the Judicial Board exists to review it; that kind of accountability is a healthy and important part of this process,” he continued. “Do I think there could be future attempts that attempt to address joint campaigning in some way? Possibly. But I think the bar is appropriately high, and I would be skeptical of any attempt that doesn’t address the free speech concerns that J-Board identified.”

While the J-Board struck down the clause, it added that if the SA amended the Joint Campaigning Clause in the Election Code to more narrowly define joint campaigning and address free speech concerns, then those changes would also apply to the Election Transparency and Equality Act.

On Feb. 24, the SA Congress unanimously approved a revised Elections Code for this cycle. When addressing joint campaigning, the revised code allows candidates to “coordinate activities,” but all candidates are “voted on individually and will not be presented to the electorate as a joint ticket.”

Nicholas Ginsberg, the SA executive vice president and a senior majoring in political science, also co-wrote the act and told Pipe Dream in a statement that he was still grateful that the legislation passed overall, adding that the Judicial Board’s decision represented the importance of checks and balances in student government.

“I added the joint campaigning clause to reflect changes in the Elections Code and make it uniform to that,” Ginsberg wrote in a statement to Pipe Dream. “The Judicial Board ruling striking down that clause is simply them doing their job — according to their interpretation, it goes against the SA Constitution. It reflects necessary checks and balances between the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary