LSU’s Student Government president vetoed a resolution Friday condemning Attorney General Jeff Landry for missing a gubernatorial election forum held on campus Sept. 13.

Anna Cate Strong, the SG president, said in a letter to the speaker of the Student Senate that “I must veto SGR 3 due to its nature as political commentary.”

Landry was the only major candidate for governor not in attendance at the forum. He was in Bossier City that night for an event with Donald Trump Jr., campaign spokesperson Kate Kelly said in a statement to the Reveille. 

READ MORE: LSU’s Student Senate condemns Jeff Landry for skipping gubernatorial forum

The resolution, passed overwhelmingly at a Student Senate meeting Wednesday, said his absence was “a detriment to the electorate.”

“Attorney General Landry’s conscious decision to participate in a hyper-partisan rally instead of an organized debate with his actual opponents reveals a calculus that disregards the full-fledged, good-faith argument of policies most concerning to the Louisiana State University community,” the resolution said.

Landry spokesperson Kelly declined to comment when reached with the news Wednesday.

Strong said she felt SG shouldn’t take a stance on the matter.

“The biggest thing is that SG is inherently an apartisan organization,” she said Friday in an interview with the Reveille, “and through condemning a political official, it takes a stance, which, written or unwritten, Student Government has not done before” to her knowledge.

Her veto — and her view on the role of SG — was met with opposition from some student senators. 

“While I completely understand arguments from both sides, I do not think that it is fair to say that we as Student Government are unable to comment on political situations,” said Sen. Corbitt Driskell, who represents the business college. “Especially when the political ramifications can have a direct effect on the policies implemented at LSU.”

Sen. Ethan Elmer, who represents the University Center for Freshman Year, expressed similar objections to the veto. He cited former resolutions as evidence that SG can take political stances.

“I do not understand the critique,” Elmer said. “…Just last semester, we passed a resolution supporting Tenureship in the wake of attacks on tenure in the Florida Legislature. Furthermore, in the wake of the January 6th insurrection, the Student Senate passed a resolution to urge [Rouses] Markets and directly call out the owner for participating in the insurrection, something which President Strong herself voted in favor of when she was a member of Senate…”

Still, Strong said she believes SG shouldn’t take a position in this situation. 

“SGR 3 is inherently a political statement, as it comments on [Landry’s] absence to a political forum and employs definitions of the United States political structure,” Strong wrote in her letter to the speaker of the Senate. “While as individuals, we may be frustrated with the actions or inactions of those who seek office in our state, we cannot speak as individuals when representing the entirety of LSU.”

LSU College Democrats expressed vehement opposition to Strong’s actions in a statement on behalf of the organization, saying that their members “stand in solidarity” with the United Campus Workers of Louisiana—the university labor union, which supported the condemnation—the Student Senate and the resolution.

“While Jeff Landry and our Student Body President may not feel a responsibility to their respective electorates,” the statement said, “Jeff Landry’s positions on tenure, diversity, equity and inclusion, academic freedom, and funding priorities matter to LSU students, faculty, and staff.”

College Democrats also called Strong’s “veto a partisan defense of a reasonable critique of Jeff Landry.”

“Now if the President truly believes that Jeff Landry is the best choice for Louisiana, we encourage her to cast that vote at the ballot box instead of weaponizing her office against the Student Body,” the statement said.

College Democrats endorsed Strong during her spring campaign for SG president. In response to the veto, they have officially rescinded that endorsement, organization president Page Gray told the Reveille.

Strong said in her letter that she was not “putting forth a political statement” through her veto. She maintained, in a comment Sunday to the Reveille, that although SG holds the responsibility of voicing student concerns, “that doesn’t mean we should take a stance as a body for, or against a gubernatorial candidate.”

“I don’t want Student Government to make formal declarations of support or condemnation, because we are not a body that stands behind or against candidates,” she said.

Graduate student senators Alicia Cerquone, the author of the resolution, and Cullen Hodges, the co-author, said that SG couldn’t afford to stay out of the election.

“The student body president of LSU has vetoed our SGR because it is ‘inherently political,’” they said in a joint statement Friday. “Being apolitical is a privilege and in itself political. The Student Government doesn’t have the privilege to stay out of the governor’s race.

“There’s too much on the line for the students we represent. We fundamentally disagree with President Strong on the role of the Student Government, because we were elected to represent the best interest of the student body in all matters related to the LSU experience.”

They also reminded their fellow senators that they will have a chance to override the veto in their next meeting on Wednesday. The meetings, held at 6:30 p.m. in the Capital Chambers of the Student Union, are open to the public.

“We will not concede to anti-democratic behaviors for the sake of maintaining the status quo by means of a quote unquote ‘apolitical posture,’” they said.

The Senate passed the resolution on Wednesday with 43 votes in favor, three against and six abstentions. The Senate needs a two-thirds vote of those present at the last meeting to override Strong’s veto.