The University Board of Elections released its Spring 2026 Rules Report Friday, outlining its handling of several complaints during the semester’s student elections, held Feb. 24-26. Among the detailed complaints is the ongoing Student Council presidential election dispute over alleged irregularities in the endorsement and campaigning processes. According to the report, UBE received 10 complaints during spring 2026 — nine of which related to student elections last month — and issued rulings in all cases. Two candidates were issued minor violations, and no major violations or disqualifications were issued.
Students voted for over 80 positions during the spring 2026 election cycle — including seats on Student Council, the Honor Committee, the University Judiciary Committee, College Councils as well as various other student leadership positions across the University.
The report outlines UBE’s role in overseeing student elections, including enforcing campaign regulations, reviewing complaints and issuing rulings through its Rules Committee. The Rules Committee is responsible for investigating alleged violations and determining whether a breach of rules occurred and assigning sanctions.
Abby Nickelson, UBE chair and fourth-year College student, wrote in an email to The Cavalier Daily that the Rules Committee considers several factors when assessing a complaint — specifically “the nature of the violation, whether it appears to have been intentional and the extent to which it affected the electoral process.”
“Our goal is consistent, impartial enforcement that protects the integrity of the election process,” Nickelson wrote.
Under UBE’s Rules and Regulations Article IV, Section 2, minor violations generally include issues such as improper campaign signage or chalking. Major violations involve conduct that is coercive, harassing or otherwise undermines the integrity of the election process — including bribery and tampering with opponents’ campaign materials. Article IV, Section 2 governs how the Rules Committee evaluates violations and considers a range of penalties — from formal warnings to disqualification. UBE attempts to resolve disputes first through mediation rather than imposing formal penalties.
Among the cases detailed in the report is the “Student Council President Rules Investigation” — an ongoing dispute from the Student Council presidential race regarding a complaint filed by third-year College student Micah Andrews Feb. 26. The complaint alleged irregularities in the endorsement process and raised concerns about a rumor that the Inter-Fraternity Council was offering to sponsor a bar tab for fraternities that achieved a certain voter turnout to elect third-year Commerce student Michael Mitchell as Student Council president.
According to the report, Andrews alleged that the bar tab was promised to fraternities with at least 80 percent voter turnout. She further claimed that the IFC and Madison House violated UBE rules by determining their endorsement before the official endorsement window and failing to interview all candidates.
UBE’s Rules Committee determined that the bar tab did not violate election rules Feb. 26 because it was not contingent on fraternity members voting for a specific candidate, but rather on overall participation. According to UBE Rules and Regulations, while the rules prohibit coercive conduct and incentivizing votes for a specific candidate, the rules also allow organizations to provide incentives for overall voting participation — as described in Article III, Section 7.
The Rules Committee also stated that the IFC had open interview slots for the Student Council president position and that candidates were informed they could contact UBE if an endorsing organization failed to interview all interested candidates.
The decision on Andrews’ original complaint was appealed March 2 and then upheld by a UBE Hearing Panel in a 3-0 decision March 12 after reviewing evidence and hearing arguments. Andrews then appealed March 12 to the Judicial Review Board. The JRB is a committee within the Students Affairs’ office that is responsible for reviewing appealed decisions to ensure the fairness of procedures and decisions in student disciplinary proceedings.
Regarding Andrews’ appeal, the JRB remanded the decision back to UBE Friday, citing an underdeveloped factual record. The JRB directed UBE to further examine key evidence related to the endorsement process, campaign conduct and the potential impact of the bar tab incentive rumor on voting turnout. The case remains pending and under further review by UBE. UBE must issue a decision by a March 27 deadline.
Nickelson wrote in her email statement to The Cavalier Daily that endorsements should be fair and transparent. She also wrote that while endorsing organizations make endorsement decisions independently, UBE oversees interviews and works to ensure all candidates have the opportunity to pursue any endorsement they are interested in.
The report also summarizes other complaints filed during the election cycle. Four complaints — 40 percent of the total — involved campaign signage. These included allegations of posters placed in restricted areas, particularly around first-year dormitories. According to the report, candidates responsible for these signage violations were contacted and asked to comply with University posting policies. UBE took no further action after candidates complied with the policies.
Another complaint alleged that a candidate had approached students and pressured them to vote in their presence. Following an investigation, UBE determined there was insufficient evidence to conclude that a violation had occurred.
A separate complaint was filed concerning ballot access. According to the report, students in the Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy’s Accelerated Master of Public Policy program did not receive ballots for Batten races. UBE coordinated with University Information Technology Services to resolve the issue and ensure the students were added to the appropriate electorates.
Another complaint involved a candidate who had been mistakenly blocked by the official UBE Instagram account. UBE determined the block was made in error, reversed the block and took no further action.
Overall, UBE determined that several complaints lacked sufficient evidence to conclude that a violation had occurred. The report notes that nine of the 10 rulings were processed within two days, though it does not provide an average processing time.
The UBE will reassess Andrews’ case next week, according to Nickelson. Following the UBE’s decision after implementing the JRB’s requests, either Andrews or Mitchell will be able to re-appeal to the JRB if they choose. The JRB will then decide whether to take the case or affirm the UBE’s March 12 decision.
“The UBE is committed to providing the JRB any additional information needed to reach a decision, should either candidate re-appeal the case to [the JRB],” Nickelson wrote in her email statement.
Read More
U.Va. School of Medicine hosts annual Match Day ceremony
By Isabela Delgado | 2 hours agoClass of 2026 School of Medicine students gathered outside of Old Cabell Hall Friday to celebrate Match Day.
Student Council amends ethics bylaw after campaign equity concerns in presidential election
By Margaret Nichols | YesterdayStudent Council passed a bylaw amendment Tuesday clarifying enforcement procedures for its code of ethics following concerns raised during the recent presidential election over how violations are handled.
Women’s Center celebrates Class of 1974 women and the Center’s graduating students
By Lily Kostro | YesterdayThe event also honored the inaugural recipient of the Spirit of 1974 Award, Simone Minor, Center intern and fourth-year College student.
