Associated Student Government’s Rules Committee announced Wednesday that it has overruled its decision to put Northwestern University College Republicans Senator Hunter Gracey on probation.
The court released its original verdict in late July after months of deliberation on an impeachment case from the Spring 2025 Quarter. The majority opinion stated that Gracey, a Weinberg junior, would be barred from participating in ASG until the following spring.
The court’s updated ruling reverses that verdict and restores Gracey’s ability to serve as NUCR’s ASG senator.
The updated ruling also declares that he will need to be reinstated or run again to be part of any subcommittee he was previously involved in. Before the court’s original decision, Gracey was a member of the Rules Committee, a subcommittee that serves as ASG’s judicial board.
“I was unaware someone had reached out regarding the original framing of the Associated Student Government’s Constitution,” Gracey said in a statement to The Daily. “I can’t thank whomever restored my capacity to represent the Northwestern University College Republicans enough.”
NUCR did not respond to a request for comment.
Former ResilientNU Senator Coby Potischman (Medill ’25) filed articles of impeachment against Gracey in May.
The original articles of impeachment alleged that Gracey made “inflammatory” comments at a dinner with three other ASG members. It was dismissed after ASG determined that discriminatory conduct falls under the purview of the University’s Office of Civil Rights and Title IX Compliance, not ASG.
According to emails obtained by The Daily, OCR reviewed the conduct and determined there was “insufficient information” to suggest it implicated OCR policy. OCR then closed the case.
Potischman filed another set of articles about a week after the first set. The second articles of impeachment were ultimately considered in the case.
Those articles alleged that Gracey had engaged in an “aggressive pressure campaign to quash duly-filed articles of impeachment” and were based on Gracey’s behavior after the first articles had been filed.
Gracey launched an OCR non-retaliation case against Potischman and claimed that the second articles of impeachment were retaliation against him for bringing the initial impeachment case to OCR. As of the time of publication, the case is still ongoing.
The court’s original ruling asserted that Gracey’s behavior “violated the ASG Constitution” and created a “hostile, unsafe and unprofessional environment within the Senate.” However, it also recognized the role mental health may have played in Gracey’s actions, which contributed to the ruling of probation rather than impeachment.
In an email acquired by The Daily, SESP sophomore and ASG Parliamentarian JJ Nabors-Moore stated that deliberations were reopened after an unnamed source provided “new, previously unattainable evidence” to the court. This information “forced the court to … consider the possible new interpretations,” according to the updated opinion.
It is unclear who the anonymous source is and what their relationship to ASG or the individuals in the case may be, even to many of the people involved, including Gracey and Potischman.
The source directed the court to the “possible original intent of the founders” of Article VII in the ASG’s Constitution. Article VII, which the court used to establish a verdict in the first majority opinion, states that ASG “does not discriminate or permit discrimination by any member of its community against any individual” based on protected characteristics.
The updated ruling says that the court, in its original interpretation, identified a type of harassment separate from those protected characteristics.
After reviewing new information, however, the court determined that Article VII mirrors a previous iteration of the University’s policy on Discrimination and Harassment and is meant to serve as a reminder of ASG’s commitment to inclusivity rather than being “an actionable statute of law.”
Because the court already established that discriminatory conduct falls under the jurisdiction of the University, it overruled its original interpretation of Article VII.
The anonymous source also argued that because of a “lack of professional evaluation,” the court’s attempt to take Gracey’s mental health into account was beyond its bounds. The court ultimately agreed. However, it clarified that it “still cares greatly about mental health concerns” but will not use it to make decisions regarding misconduct going forward.
The court originally stated that Gracey’s conduct violated his responsibilities as a senator. This assertion was based on Article II, Section V of ASG’s Constitution, which says that “all officers … shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of … the failure to perform those duties prescribed in this Constitution.”
The court decided that interference with a case is punishable, but it could not say for sure that Gracey’s actions were deliberately disruptive. The court was concerned with the precedent it would set if it found Gracey guilty of interrupting proceedings without evidence of his intentions.
“I respect the committee’s decision and wish ASG the best,” Potischman said in a statement to The Daily.
Email: [email protected]
Related Stories:
— ASG puts College Republicans senator on probation
— Impeachment case against NUCR ASG senator awaiting decision
— ASG Senate swears in new co-presidents, passes three resolutions
