On Oct. 16, 2024, the Associated Students of the University of California, Riverside (ASUCR) senate ratified three judicial nominations proposed by ASUCR Executive President Abby Choy. These individuals will be in charge of “adjudicating any conflicts, violations, inconsistencies and clarity issues with the actions and documents of ASUCR,” as outlined by the Judicial Rules of Procedure document.
Prior to the ratification of the justices, President Choy reminded the senate that she had shared interview notes and applications of reach of the candidates and that the Executive Cabinet (ECAB) had selected them after their interview process.
The first candidate for associate justice was Jaden Nguyen, a second-year political science major. He shared that he had served as an executive first-year fellow under last year’s elections director, and that “whether it’s at a candidate’s workshop, presidential debates or my first-year fellow meetings” he has navigated the bylaws to uphold his commitment to his constituents, the students. From his experience last year, he explained, “I have learned to always base my opinion on precedents, evidence and subpoenas … and consistently use my voice and my vote with the student body’s best interest in mind.” If ratified, Nguyen promised to hold question and answer panels with the student body, do a comprehensive review of their bylaws and plans on reintroducing the ASUCR free legal clinic.
Vaneet Pani, third-year sociology and political science major, stood on the platform of “making fair and informed decisions” that positively impacted the community. During her first year at UCR, Pani explained that she was not directly involved in campus activities, but she paid close attention to events and movements that took place on campus. She watched events such as the teaching assistant (TA) strikes and “understood that the root of their demands were centered on policies that affect not only their lives, but also the academic experience of every student at UCR.” She shares that watching organizations such as the graduate students and Students for Justice in Palestine shape her understanding of policy making and shows to her that “it’s through policies and judicial process[es] that we address concerns [and] solve problems.” As a justice, Pani promised to be “an advocate for students who feel like they don’t have a voice” and to “create a culture of transparency and accountability.”
The final candidate for judicial office was Catherine Ibrahim, a third-year political science major who has been involved within ASUCR for two years as part of the elections committee. Through her past experience in ASUCR, she shared that she has worked collaboratively with fellow committee members and the judicial branch “to ensure fair, transparent election process.” Her “commitment to fairness, impartiality and justice,” which she says stem from her personal experience, has given her a strong understanding of the importance of upholding these qualities. She explained that growing up as a Coptic Christian, a minority, in Egypt, she has seen firsthand “the impact of injustice and the impact of the lack of a fair, impartial court system.” If ratified, she promised that she would ensure her decisions would be “made as fairly and transparently as possible” and will work towards creating “a more equitable and responsive governance curriculum.”
After moving to a closed session, the senate discussed the three candidates presented and ratified them all for positions as associate justices.
