“We feel that we have been slighted…We want to make sure that our message is present: that the HUA needs to be replaced.”
Though Trinity Dysis ’27 is “well aware” that she is a freshman, since arriving at Harvard, Dysis has understood the problems that have faced Harvard’s student government for quite some time. “It really disturbed me how our Student Government has been so consistently the center of inefficacy and scandal… Lucas came to me with the offer to try to make a change to reform it to get rid of it, and I was 100% on board.”
Lucas Chu ’23-25, her mutual friend, also holds long-standing concerns with the system, having observed and helped with the dissolution of the Undergraduate Council (UC), which was the official student government system until students abolished it in 2022 and created the Harvard Undergraduate Association (HUA) in its place. But, the HUA has been plagued by scandals even in its infancy, from being accused of rejecting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion plans to a decrease in student organization funding. Chu’s concerns resurfaced when current HUA Co-President John Cooke ’25 was expelled from the Fox Club due to misconduct allegations.
“I felt particularly convinced that maybe I should do something, so then I decided to run for Student Government on the platform of disbanding the Student Government,” Chu explained. “[I believe] there’s a problem with the culture of the whole institution, and the institution itself should also be held accountable,” he continued.
Chu and Dysis decided to run together on a platform of formally disbanding the HUA. Their platform was sent to students on April 1 by the HUA Election Commission, alongside the eight other tickets on the next HUA Co-Presidency ballot. “Like most Harvard students, I voted to abolish the UC, but I now realize that its replacement is not working well. In a time where university issues are shafting our quality of life, it seems like the main thing coming out of our representatives is scandalous headlines…[A] lack of accountability is a systemic issue,” the statement explains.
Soon after their initial announcement of candidacy, Chu and Dysis’ ticket disappeared. They were not present at the April 3 debate hosted by the Harvard Political Review, nor were they posted by the HUA Election Commission Instagram as an eligible ticket. The HUA Election Commission then announced on Instagram on April 3 that the Chu/Dysis ticket was dissolved following “multiple rule violations:” one regarding campaign emails, one on early campaigning, and one discussing campaign focus.
Chu and Dysis’ conflict with the HUA Election Commission began before their ticket was formally announced, as Chu explained, when he emailed the HUA Election Commission to initiate recall petitions for both Cooke and the other HUA Co-President, Shikoh Hirabayashi ’24. Chu’s petition to recall Cooke was denied, as the Harvard Feminist Coalition (HFC) had already initiated a recall petition for him. Chu’s petition to recall Hirabayashi was approved.
On the evening of March 31, Chu sent out a mass email to student email addresses acquired from the Harvard College Facebook. The email contained links to recall petitions for both Cooke and Hirabayashi. In addition, the email contained a petition for a constitutional referendum to disband the HUA. “No more scandals. No more presidents. No more HUA. Let existing orgs do what they do best. Sign on to disband the HUA at https://bit.ly/disbandHUA,” read the final two sentences of the email. Because the email contained similar language to Chu and Dysis’ campaign platform but was sent before the campaign period began, the HUA Election Commission considered it early campaigning—the first election rule violation. Yet, Chu felt this was unwarranted: “I wanted to get something out before campaigning started so it wouldn’t be construed as campaigning,” he explained.
In addition, this email contained the phrase: “Allegedly, all HUA members, except one officer, have been complicit in silencing victims, and so have parts of the administration.” The HUA Election Commission considered this to violate the campaign rule that “Campaigns should focus on policy and keep campaign communications centered on the candidate’s own platform, not on the character or policies of other candidates.”
In an email chain obtained by the Independent, Chu planned to meet with the Election Commission and Assistant Dean Andy Donahue to discuss the emails he had sent out; he then changed his email wording to reflect their recommendations. Chu, Dysis, and other affiliates subsequently sent out the updated emails advocating for students to sign their petition, writing “The Harvard Undergraduate Association should not tolerate or be involved in the harassment or the suppression of victims.” This was considered to be the third violation, under the premise that “Campaign emails to group lists (including House and club lists) and cold emails to individuals as well as campaign texts to organized group chats will be banned.” The Chu/Dysis ticket was then dissolved.
Chu expressed that the rules of the HUA Election Commission felt very unclear. “The way I interpreted that is that campaign emails, including cold emails, are banned. Cold emails in and of themselves are not banned…because that’s basically saying you can’t send any emails.”
“I don’t feel it’s clear, and we did not understand the basis on which we were being pulled off of,” Dysis recalled. “While yes, [the emailed petitions] were related to the HUA at large, they were completely unrelated to our campaign… I feel like that if somebody else had put out an email that was not related to these specific allegations, [similar consequences] would not have been brought up, and Lucas and I both feel like these actions were retaliatory.” The HUA Election Commission did not comment further on the situation or their election policies, only reiterating their initial statement in an email to the Independent.
Even though Dysis disagrees “with the principle of the rule” they had violated, the two former candidates, knowing what they know now, both acknowledge that they would not have sent the emails and enlisted more friends to circulate their petition instead. Yet despite being disbanded for their actions, they still stand strong behind the message they hope to send. “It proves our point that this is a broken system that works to serve itself and limits the people who try to criticize it,” Dysis expressed.
Chu echoed Dysis’ sentiments. “Someone said to me, and I agree with it, that this is a continuation of the silencing of voices advocating for justice… It proves my point in the sense that it’s censoring petitions out. Maybe fittingly, this means I can send more emails now and can provide more information that… aren’t censored, because I’m no longer running [on a] ticket.”
Since their ticket was dissolved, Chu informed the Independent that he was reported to the Harvard College Administrative Board due to what he believes was potentially violating “a rule against cold emailing.” However, the two expressed that they have not given up their mission just yet. “This only fuels Lucas and I’s resolve to accomplish a task that we set forth to do,” Dysis said. They plan to release a petition within the first three weeks of next semester, following policy rules, to formally dissolve the HUA. “We want to see the system replaced with something more effective and less corrupt.”
“I honestly thought it was the right thing to do,” Chu said, reflecting back on the situation. “I saw an injustice, and I couldn’t do nothing. If I didn’t do anything, then I think I would have failed.”
Kayla Reifel ’26 (kaylareifel@college.harvard.edu) and Layla Chaaraoui ’26 (laylachaaraoui@college.harvard.edu) write News for the Independent.