UPDATE (April 16, 2025): For the second time this year, Ali Khatib was elected president of the Murray State University Student Government Association. According to the Murray State News, Khatib received 867 votes, while incumbent Brendan Hawkins only received 838, in the special election held Monday and Tuesday.
MURRAY – Murray attorney Dominik Mikulcik filed a lawsuit against Murray State University (MSU) President Robert “Bob” Jackson in Calloway Circuit Court yesterday on behalf of two students who were impacted, albeit in different ways, by the Student Judicial Board’s recent decision to vacate the results of the March Student Government Association (SGA) election and schedule a new election to be held next week.
The students, Ali Khatib and Jesus Figueroa Martinez (Figueroa), assert that the board’s decision violated not only their rights but also policies of the MSU Board of Regents.
Khatib won the race for SGA president, prevailing over incumbent Brendan Hawkins by a margin of two votes. After the results were announced, Hawkins petitioned the judicial board, requesting to overturn the election results and call a special election, citing concerns around voter eligibility, namely that Racer Academy students and faculty members enrolled in courses were allowed to vote.
Figueroa is a Murray High School (MHS) student enrolled in dual credit courses through Racer Academy. He was allowed to cast a ballot in the March election, but the new definition of an ‘eligible voter’ outlined in the board’s decision makes him ineligible to vote in the upcoming election.
They brought the civil suit against Jackson, specifically, because they claim that, as the chief executive of the university, he has the authority to correct the judicial board’s “erroneous decision” and is duty-bound to uphold the Board of Regents’ policies; however, Jackson has “refused or unreasonably delayed” taking action on the matter. They are asking the court to compel Jackson to suspend the upcoming election and ratify the March results.
In his petition, Hawkins accused Khatib of campaign violations by visiting MHS, his alma mater, to solicit votes from students enrolled in dual credit classes. He also took issue with the fact that some faculty members who are enrolled in classes at MSU participated in student elections and argued that a “change in the voting system” allowed previously ineligible students to cast a ballot.
The judicial board is comprised of seven students who serve as justices. The board’s authority is narrow in scope, relating only to matters concerning the university’s Code of Conduct, the SGA Constitution and parking/traffic violations.
On March 31, the board held a hearing on Hawkins’ petition and published its opinion later that day. The justices conceded that his petition was filed out-of-time; therefore, they did not consider any alleged campaign violations because SGA’s policy on election procedures and requirements states that any challenges to an election must be made, in writing, prior to the election results being announced.
Despite the “unambiguous limitation to challenge” the election results, the petition states, the board did entertain Hawkins’ claims regarding voter eligibility.
According to the opinion penned by SGA Judicial Board Chief Justice Piper McClain, the board heard testimony from Brantley Travis, director of business and student information solutions, who reported 1397 Racer Academy students and 96 faculty members had credentials to vote in the March election, and of those, 31 students and 15 faculty cast ballots.
Retired SGA Advisor Jeanie Morgan also testified that “the intention of voter eligibility” in SGA’s constitution was never meant to include Racer Academy student or faculty members.
The opinion characterizes the constitutional language around voter eligibility as “vague and limited.” As such, the board to the bylaws which state that any full-time or part-time student, with “part-time” being defined as an undergraduate taking seven to 11 credit hours or a graduate taking five to eight hours, can run for an SGA office, with the exception that part-time students cannot hold an executive council position.
“Though the Judicial Board recognizes that the initial intent of this bylaw may have been to set rules of what candidates could run for office,” McClain wrote in the opinion, “[but] with no clear written explanation as to what a ‘Student’ is within the SGA Constitution, the board concluded that this was the most fair way of including highly engaged Racer Academy Students, or Faculty members who are taking a significant number of credit hours.”
Ultimately, the board vacated the March results and scheduled a new election on April 14-15, specifying that only part- and full-time students, as defined by the ruling, are eligible to participate; however, the opinion did note that MSU faculty and Racer Academy students may participate, provided they meet all of the requirements other students must meet. Finally, the board called on the Student Senate to act swiftly to amend the SGA Constitution to clarify the definition of a “student” as well as the qualifications students must meet in order to vote in SGA elections.
The plaintiffs assert that the board’s decision amounted to amending SGA’s bylaws. The authority to amend the bylaws, however, is vested in the student senate, not the judicial board; furthermore, enforcement of the bylaws falls to the SGA Election/Ways and Means Committee. Constitutional amendments require approval from either 75% of the student senate or 25% of the student body and are contingent on approval from the MSU Board of Regents.
The petition argues that no evidence was presented during the hearing that “this election differed in any manner to the recent prior elections” and that “the record is consistent with voter eligibility and the manner of voting remaining substantially unchanged.” It further argues that the board “incorrectly concluded that only vague and limited information from the SGA Constitution was available to define an ‘eligible voter.’”
“Based on the erroneous belief the voter eligibility was not clearly defined,” the petition states, “the [judicial board] went outside of the four corners of the documentation before them and used [testimony] from an unqualified witness to determine intent and fashion a new rule for determining voter eligibility.”
Specifically, according to the petition, the board made the requirements outlined in the SGA Constitution for a student to run for SGA offices, excluding executive council positions, a prerequisite for voter eligibility and used “its new rule to void the previously announced election results … and directed a subsequent, illegal election to occur.”
Additionally, the petition alleges that one of the justices is a member of the same fraternity as Hawkins, creating an “apparent conflict of interest” that, according to the Association of Governing Board (AGB) Statement on Conflict of Interest, required him to recuse from the proceedings. Khatib challenged the justice’s impartiality during the March 31 hearing; however, the board “willfully, wantonly, or negligently failed to exclude” him from voting.
As the winning candidate, the petition maintains, Khatib’s rights and privileges as the incoming SGA president – including a seat on the board of regents, a scholarship worth $4,000 for in-state students or $6,000 for out-of-state students and a parking pass – were vested once the election results were announced. After that point, the judicial board lacked the authority to recall the election, and pursuant to the SGA Constitution, Khatib could only be removed from office by a petition of 25% of the constituency.
Mikulcik also filed two motions yesterday. The first requested a temporary emergency injunction to halt the April election. It argues that SGA held the March election under the “existing applicable rules,” but after the results were announced, the judicial board changed the qualifications for voting, disenfranchising certain students, and scheduled a new election.
“Disenfranchisement is a clear restriction on liberty and in this case a due process violation,” the motion states. “Allowing the scheduled election to proceed without allowing him to participate as a Murray State Student will violate (Figueroa’s) right to participate.”
The second motion requested that Calloway Circuit Court Judge Andrea Moore recuse herself from the proceedings, citing a belief that McClain worked closely with Moore while completing a summer internship.
Both motions are set for hearing on April 21 at 2:05 p.m.
Editor’s note: Allegations made in a civil lawsuit only represent one side of an issue. All parties are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
This story was updated April 11 at 11:56 a.m.
