Stone sculpture adorns the Ohio Union on Wednesday. Undergraduate Student Government (USG) will hold a new election during autumn 2025. Credit: Daniel Bush | Campus Photo Editor
Undergraduate Student Government (USG) will be required to hold a new election at the start of the 2025 autumn semester, following misconduct charges against candidates, disqualifications and university intervention in the spring 2025 campaign period.
In a May 27 email obtained by The Lantern, Melissa Shivers, the senior vice president for the Office of Student Life said “the outcomes of that review identified a number of procedural errors and inconsistencies throughout the election process, along with additional contributing factors that further exacerbated the situation.”
According to Shivers’ email, the investigation also found “significant, unhealthy and negative organizational culture issues within USG election process, including but not limited to allegations of harassment, discrimination and bullying.”
Initial reactions
The reactions to this email differed between the presidential candidates.
“It’s very disappointing, the decision that they came to,” Amjad Almuti, an incoming fourth-year in psychology and former USG presidential candidate, said in an interview. “Ohio State’s administration essentially had their hand forced by lawyers, indirect political threats and, overall, a lack of care for democracy in the student government.”
Oliver Griffith, an incoming third-year in molecular genetics and former USG presidential candidate, disagrees.
“I know many students on all sides of this are disappointed that we have to redo the election, but regardless of who someone supports and the past election this spring, it’s important that we redo this election,” Griffith said in an interview. “I believe the Office of Student Life chose to initiate a new autumn election because it was in the interests of not only their body, but also the university, that there’s proper representation and the opportunity to hear from all groups across different backgrounds, beliefs and ways of life.”
Daizhon Cox, an incoming fourth-year in political science and former presidential candidate, said in an interview that he felt that they were going to have a new race, but said he feels that not every candidate, specifically Griffith and Almuti, should have a “clean slate.”
When he learned of the decision for a re-election, Cox said he was disappointed that the process was restarted and the candidates will have to redo their campaign. Additionally, Cox said it will be a very different presidency compared to other years because the 2025-26 president won’t serve for an entire term due to the re-election happening in the fall. At the time of publication, elections for the next president will be set in the spring, as it has been previously.
Chay Robert Rossing, an incoming fifth-year in French and Francophone studies, philosophy and religious studies, who was a presidential candidate for the spring 2025 election cycle, did not reply to The Lantern’s request for comment in time for publication.
The email from Shivers follows the postponement of the election results after the Office of Student Life opened an investigation into the election process.
Griffith requested the review in an email sent April 4 with a letter addressed to Shivers, John W. Zeiger, chair of the Ohio State Board of Trustees and a founding partner of Zeiger, Tigges & Little LLP and Anne Schira, senior associate general counsel and director of legal operations and strategic initiatives at the Ohio State Office of Legal Affairs, where he urged the Office of Student Life to investigate the spring 2025 election. Griffith clarified that he did not have any prior communications with Zeiger and Schira prior to sending this email.
“I think this whole issue started because Oliver Griffith didn’t get his way, so he threw a temper tantrum,” Almuti said in an interview. “He started insulting USG members, lashing out online. He was degrading the judicial panel and immediately started dragging in lawyers and the school trustees instead of working through the judicial and student government channels.”
Almuti said that though the Panel ruled against him and his team multiple times, his campaign “accepted their decision even when we disagreed with them.”
Griffith, however, said that the current USG system was “flawed” which “led the spring election getting so out of control that the university was left with no other choice but to redo the election.”
Cox said he believes Almuti and Griffith’s campaign was “all about power.”
“I genuinely thought that we were all advocating for the opportunity to advocate for the students,” Cox said. “I thought we were going to make flyers and go back and forth on the Oval and do debates.”
Rossing said in an Instagram post his campaign decided not to run again in the fall.
“But as I see it, choosing to run is the wrong decision—and if we were to run we would have to either sacrifice our health, our dignity, or worse—our message,” Rossing said in the post about him and his running mate, Kathrina Noma, an incoming fourth-year in public management, leadership and policy.
Rossing continued, stating, “And, while I think that character makes me a good leader, I now also realize it means that I am a horrible candidate for this election.”
Cox said he plans to run again in the fall to “strictly advocate for students.” He believes the student body needs “consistency and stability” after the USG election investigation.
“People are going to get a fearless fighter, somebody who is going to be able to come advocate directly for the students, directly to a president that sometimes needs to answer to us,” Cox said.
He said he plans to review the USG Constitution and bylaws to make them clearer in order to not repeat common violations for the next spring election.
Griffith and Almuti’s campaigns have not publicly announced if they are running for the fall 2025 election.
Shivers said that the outcome to have a new election is necessary.
“I know that this outcome may be surprising, and perhaps even disappointing to some students and other community members, but I strongly believe this course of action is necessary to ensure a fair, credible and respectful student government election process,” Shivers said in an email obtained by The Lantern.
Election background
Before the spring 2025 election, all candidates accused each other of misconduct. Some of the results led to more severe punishments than others.
The majority of the judicial hearings addressed electoral infractions per prior Lantern reporting, mainly focusing on signature discrepancies and early campaigning.
Additionally, candidates could be found not guilty if the bylaw was wrongly stated by the plaintiff or insufficient evidence, which happened in multiple opinions.
On Feb. 23, Griffith was found guilty of one of the several accusations made against him. He faced a $150 penalty from his campaign budget for bullying and harassment to other candidates after he sent a message to Chay Robert Rossing, an upcoming fifth-year in French and Francophone studies, philosophy and religious studies, according to the opinion.
Griffith stated, “I value a unified student government the most and wouldn’t want anyone else in your roles either, so if you guys decide not to run then I would want those roles to be available for you. However, that offer will not be in place if you choose to run.”
Griffith was removed from the race on Mar. 27 after his campaign was found guilty of placing palm cards for his campaign under windshields of cars in the Buckeye Lot—located at 2701 Fred Taylor Drive, per prior Lantern reporting.This type of signage is only allowed on “designated open posting boards and kiosks,” according to the opinion.
The fine was more than Griffith’s campaign had left in their budget, disqualifying them from the race. Griffith appealed this decision on April 2, and while the Panel found one reason for his appeal to be valid, they continued to uphold their Mar. 27 decision.
Cox was disqualified from the race on Feb. 19 after falsifying documents to the panel by collecting signatures with an “unofficial circulator,” which results in a “minimum penalty of disqualification,” according to the opinion.
In direct messaging, Cox asked an anonymous student to help circulate his petition to collect signatures, the opinion stated. The person said they would be interested in helping and asked if Cox should be listed as the circulator, whereas Cox said to put his name down, according to the opinion.
Cox attempted to appeal the judicial opinion by arguing the requirement that the circulator names must be in a specific subsection lacked “textual foundation” but the panel maintained their decision, stating “the guidelines clearly distinguish between candidate names and circulator names.”
Rossing was found guilty on Feb. 23 for not providing the required field for circulators to put their names on the candidates petition. Despite them removing signatures that were included in the incorrect petition, Rossing’s campaign was able to stay in the race because the remaining valid signatures met the threshold to be added to the ballot, according to the judicial opinion.
Additionally, Almuti was fined $450 for early campaigning on a Feb. 24 opinion. The panel found that Almuti’s campaign website posted language soliciting votes and found Instagram accounts affiliated with their campaign before they were allowed.
