USG executives resign, call out anti-Blackness in organization
March 24, 2021
During the Undergraduate Student Government’s 12th Senate session, held this past Tuesday, several members of the organization recounted their negative experiences during their time in office, sparking a discussion about the structures of white supremacy that are upheld within USG.
Justin Hartley, director of diversity, inclusion, and equity, announced their resignation in solidarity with Black candidates who faced anti-Black harassment during their campaigns this past week.
“I am disappointed with this body and I believe there needs to be institutional reform that goes beyond simply changing bylaws or having the occasional CEA training,” Hartley said. “This is about the nature of USG. It is clear that this body is both intentionally and unintentionally anti-Black.”
Following Hartley, Director of Campus Services Mia Harris, who ran for president but lost to Jamie Roa, read a statement detailing the race- and gender-driven attacks she faced, including being called racial slurs such as the N-word, and also announced her resignation. Senator DaSean Spencer, who ran for vice president of student life but lost to Holly Steinberg, read a statement detailing how damaging the election process was to his health but announced that he planned to remain in USG.
In light of the statements made by Hartley, Harris and Spencer, USG made the decision to shift the meeting to a conversation about the organization’s culture and problems. During this conversation, Director of Sustainability Ella Catherine Strahan, also resigned in solidarity with Hartley, Harris and Spencer.
As the discussion opened up, many members directed their attention to the recent behavior exhibited by campaign teams and, specifically, the weaponization of election processes such as infractions. Both Harris and Spencer had several pages of infractions filed against them. Infractions filed against Harris discredited her labor by alleging she lied about her accomplishments and included photos of her crying. None of the infractions submitted against Harris were deemed valid by the Awards and Elections committee.
Many infractions filed against Spencer, which claimed that he was taking credit away from others and misleading the public, were also determined to be unfounded by the AEC.
“The infractions submitted by opposing candidates called DaSean a liar and implied that he is a sexist who ‘diminished the work of women,’” Hartley, who worked on Spencer’s campaign, said. “These baseless and insidious remarks will stay with DaSean for the rest of his time at Tulane and beyond.”
As a result of his experience, Spencer has been advocating for increased transparency between USG and the Tulane community.
“We can’t allow students to think that that election was the slightest bit fair and free and wasn’t riddled with anti-Blackness and targeted harassment,” Spencer said. “I want to call upon to students to take note and demand they release information on the events that transpired during this election, as they promised me in my infractions hearing, and as their bylaws explicitly state they must.”
As it stands, the bylaws of the AEC state in Article VII Section 3G that “The AEC must release all additional election information it deems necessary to promote transparency and student accessibility.”
President-elect Roa condemned the behavior exhibited this past week, including that of her team and expressed support for abolishing the infraction system.
“I’d like to apologize for the infractions on behalf of my campaign, and I’d like to condemn the words and the name calling used against the candidates,” she said in the session. “There is no place for this language, there is no place for these infractions, and quite frankly it is too toxic to continue like this again.”
Beyond the actions exhibited during elections, several members pointed out the pervasiveness of anti-Blackness throughout USG.
“I know the bylaws like the back of my hand and every single change I’ve helped push forward or that I’ve thought of making or ‘solution’ I’ve thought about to help ‘reform’ this body in anyway is in some way consumed by white supremacy culture,” Executive Vice President Reagan McKinney wrote in the chat of the Zoom meeting.
Harris argues that USG is intentionally structured so that only a certain type of member is able to hold positions of power.
“Really, the whole notion of a student government, anyone should be able to run and be able to represent the student body, but that’s not how it works,” Harris said. “You kind of have to be, we’ve been calling it, ‘the heir apparent’ to the USG. So, I think that’s the way it is because it’s an organization that’s been built by people who like to hoard power and who like to uphold white supremacy.”
Despite the revelations of the Senate session and her personal experience, Harris expressed belief that USG can change.
“The system we have right now just doesn’t work, it doesn’t,” Harris said. “I think everyone acknowledged that in the meeting, and we can move from here and we can go to something that’s better, that works for people, that people can actually feel proud of.”
Hartley also expressed their belief in the possibility of change within the USG but emphasized the role of accountability.
“I believe there will be change in USG — if the perpetrators of these actions are held accountable,” Hartley said. “If they are not I believe the organization will backslide into similar patterns.”
Changing the bylaws immediately was proposed during the meeting, but USG executives said that rewriting the laws that night would not be “the most productive thing.” They did, however, immediately suspend the infraction form on Wavesync pending review.
Members of USG are currently planning on reaching out to candidates who were affected by the student elections and also plan on discussing the possibility of rewriting the organization’s bylaws.
Larry Masters • Mar 31, 2021 at 10:03 am
Walter,
I read your comment with extreme sadness. Somebody (probably many people) spent their money on something they felt was important: providing opportunity for students to attend Tulane. In accepting that opportunity, you are not under any obligation to love Tulane, pay forward the opportunity, or even refrain from criticizing the Institution that invested in you. However, your decision to tear down the institution does have consequences for the students following behind you. They will not attend an “enlightened paradise” created by your actions, instead they may not get a chance to attend Tulane at all. Calling people racist and terrible while accepting their money is not a recipe for change. It is an invitation for people to stop giving. Would you finance an education for someone who despises you?
I am sorry you had a terrible time at Tulane. It is far from a perfect institution. I wish you success so that you can provide Tulane the resources to make it a better place. It is much more difficult to build and improve than to tear down.
Best,
Larry
Student • Mar 26, 2021 at 11:43 am
@USG “no candidate should be treated differently based upon their identity. ”
I think you’re missing the point USG. We’re not arguing that it’s all outcome based. Until I see concrete evidence, my understanding from what their claiming in the article is that they got infractions that having nothing to do with their “identity” and now they’re whining about it and claiming it’s racist. Personal attacks on character are a key part of politics these days unfortunately. It has nothing to do with race. The fact that people are claiming that this was “racism” is scary. What are we allowed to do anymore? Can we not make fair criticisms of someone at all because their black? I know the people in all the people USG are radically left and I doubt any are “racist”
Walter Ogozaly • Mar 25, 2021 at 12:37 pm
Fact is Tulane is a small elite school built on plantation land and serving the needs of white suburbanites across the country, their xanax wine moms and finance dads. The institution is practically screaming its priorities. These USG disputes, to me, are just symptoms of the underlying problem—that Tulane would rather climb the US News rankings than serve the mostly black population of New Orleans. Disgusting.
Articles like this are important and vital. But if people really want to make administrators change, I would suggest flooding College Confidential with negative reviews of the school. Scare the prospective students away. Administrators see nothing but the bottom line. If you scare the rich whites away, President Fitts and his 8 teeth will meet you at the negotiating table tomorrow.
Had I understood what this school was before I attended, I would never have attended. Future students need to reckon with Tulane becoming the next Washington & Lee. Who wants to be affiliated with this crap? I will be dragging this school’s reputation through the mud until the day I die. And they gave me a full scholarship to do so 😉
So my point: STOP FIGHTING EACH OTHER AND LOOK UP! Make them fear for their jobs. They must love to see us blame each other while they get RICH shoving POC into every admissions brochure. Just my two (angry) cents.
Dixie Normus • Mar 25, 2021 at 12:26 pm
It is disheartening to see many of the things alleged in this piece, but it must be said that the rhetoric and examples employed are not conductive to effective reform in our student body. We must always be militantly anti-racist, but in doing so we mustn’t blur the line between general criticism and racially charged messaging. Some of the allegations in this essay are simply not connected to racism, but they seem to imply that any criticism of BIPOC students has a racial/white supremacist intention. This is intellectually lazy at best, and disgustingly disingenuous at worst. When we try to out-virtue signal each other by associating fair critiques with unacceptable discrimination, we run the enormous and consequential risk of watering down the true meaning of anti-Black sentiments, harming our BIPOC community by painting them as inherent victims who cannot tolerant any rebuttals of their work or character. This, in my view, is another manifestation of the “White Man’s Burden,” whereby white saviors attempt to save black victims who are viewed as being incapable of saving themselves or handling their own difficulties. We also must be more understandings of our mutual flaws; we must stop throwing out precious human lives from our societies when they make (even egregious) missteps, particularly when they are in their worst moments. I am indeed a militant anti-racist, but this sentiment comes strictly from the standpoint of being pro-human, not pro-black and certainly not anti-white. We must learn to move beyond our divisions so that we can have proper nuanced conversations that are conductive to a harmonious community, and I’m afraid this piece falls short in achieving this. Again, I stand in solidarity with the victims of racial abuse involved in this incident, but we can and must do better.
Student • Mar 25, 2021 at 12:04 pm
As a member of the USG Senate I can attest that this organization upholds each and every tenant of white supremacy. I’m disgusted by some of the above comments. It’s not about winning or losing, it’s about bringing about justice for the individuals affected by blatant anti-Blackness and racism. Here’s a link to the Senate session for those interested https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IrukP4bGaYSAJOVKv717JlIoKCfm0vkj/view?usp=sharing
USG • Mar 25, 2021 at 12:01 pm
I think a lot of these comments are missing the point. Regardless of the outcomes of an election or the qualifications of any candidate, no candidate should be treated differently based upon their identity. Any discussion of the merits of candidates is not relevant because anti-Blackness had no place in this election to begin with and negatively affected the mental health and wellbeing of these candidates. Even if some of these anti-Black comments were made by people who were not running in the election, it falls on the candidates to address their impact rather than intent, and the blatant acts taken by some candidates definitely deserve to be brought to light. Good on DaSean, Justin, and Mia for telling their stories. I’m sure that took a lot of courage.
M • Mar 25, 2021 at 11:48 am
Doesn’t surprise me to hear about these comments, this campus is racist AF and this is an unfortunate wake up call. From my perspective, USG is run by a bunch of elitist snobs that are too busy worrying about their law school applications to actually connect with the student body. They write all these stupid little by-laws just so they can hoard their power and keep the outsiders out. We’re sick of it… Glad these conversations are happening.
Sydney Thomas • Mar 25, 2021 at 11:44 am
Wow… this comment section did pass the vibe check. These comments show just how toxic USG and its supporters are. We’ve gotta hold this org accountable for the blatant anti-blackness they were/are complicit in throughout the election process and throughout their day to day activities.
Student • Mar 25, 2021 at 11:21 am
Might I add that SLA is a separate student government and not a part of USG. If Jamie was SOO qualified why did she not manage to get any major endorsements from the organizations that they went up against?
Parent • Mar 25, 2021 at 11:19 am
This is very disappointing to see. No students deserves such blatant discrimination, especially over student government elections. Hopefully the students who did this will be held accountable but something tells me that they won’t…..With all the violence happening towards minorities, and especially as a minority parent, this makes me very, very, very, very, very sad to see.
Student • Mar 25, 2021 at 11:17 am
Might I add that SLA President is not a part of USG government, it’s a separate body entirely. Also, Jamie was SOO much more qualified but couldn’t manage to get any major endorsement when they went up against each other?
Alumni • Mar 25, 2021 at 11:10 am
Wow, it’s disgusting to see what the other candidates did to win! Makes me ashamed to say that this is my alma mater. Why hasn’t admin made a strong stance against this racism?
Student • Mar 25, 2021 at 10:35 am
So Mia resigns her position in protest… only to run for sla president. What a joke. Seems like someone is a sore loser. I watched the debates, heard both candidate’s platforms, and voted for Jamie. Jamie was more qualified and deserved her win.
Emmett Fitz • Mar 25, 2021 at 10:13 am
Wow …..it just gets worse and worse. Don’t believe any of the “racist” allegations. Very convenient to claim victimhood. Show us the evidence. In this climate and particularly at this university very doubtful someone just came up and used racial slurs. Normally the cell phone is out recording everything. Bottom line is if you lost it wasn’t because of your race or gender. Believe it or not somethings the other candidate is better qualified. And that goes with any type of employment. Sometimes the other person is better than you. Time to grow up and learn to achieve by not blaming others or whining.
And I can’t wait for the fallout from my comment. I don’t care. At least I have an opinion and sorry if it infuriates a bunch of cry babies or closet racists.
Student • Mar 25, 2021 at 9:57 am
Sounds like someone’s behaving like a sore loser and scapegoating their failures… Are BIPOC people allowed to lose anymore or is it racist? Sounds like a authoritarian attempt to gain power