Why I Attended the ASUC Hearing — But Refused to Participate

Calvin Yang, Executive Vice President-elect of External Affairs, Speaks to ASUC Members at Hearing

ASUC Hearing at Eshleman Hall on UC Berkeley Campus

On Tuesday night, I attended a hearing held by the Associated Students of the University of California (ASUC), which is the student government of the University of California, Berkeley. The hearing centered on Calvin Yang, who was recently elected to ASUC as Executive Vice President of External Affairs.

Yang is being charged with misrepresenting himself as a spokesperson for BayPass, a regional student transit program operated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) — the Bay Area’s regional transportation planning agency.

BayPass is a universal transit pass that gives students free access to nearly all major public transportation systems in the Bay Area, including BART, AC Transit, and Muni. The program began as a pilot in recent years and proved immensely popular. In the very election that brought Calvin Yang into office, UC Berkeley’s student body voted overwhelmingly to expand the program and make it permanent — a vision known as “BayPass for All.”

Calvin Yang ran on that platform. Now, following his victory, supporters of his opponent have brought forward accusations that he falsely represented himself as an official BayPass spokesperson — accusations now being weighed by ASUC’s Judicial Council.

Wanting to understand the seriousness of the claim, I investigated the issue myself. I contacted a high-ranking official at the MTC, shared the evidence being used in the ASUC hearing, and asked whether the agency believed Yang’s conduct violated its copyright or trademark.

The official’s response was clear:

“The MTC would not get involved in the ASUC matter unless there was a copyright violation.” “Only the MTC can enforce violations of its own trademark — and this does not appear to be a violation.”

They went on to explain:

“Anybody can use the BayPass name in a public forum, so long as they don’t represent themselves as an official spokesperson of the BayPass program.”

 “Based on the evidence you presented, it does not appear that the MTC would have any claim against Calvin.”

They added that MTC welcomes public discussion of BayPass at its meetings — whether supportive or critical — and considers such dialogue part of the democratic process.

After ASUC leaders learned I had conducted this reporting, the Judicial Council attempted to subpoena me — a private citizen and journalist — to appear at the hearing.

That’s why I attended. Not as a participant. Not as a witness. I attended only to report on the hearing.

Earlier in the week, I received an email from ASUC Judicial Council Justice Anvi Gaikwad claiming that I was being "subpoenaed." As a journalist with more than 30 years of experience, I recognized immediately that the “subpoena” was not legally valid. ASUC has no judicial standing and no authority to issue subpoenas of any kind.

Here lies the greatest irony: ASUC is holding a hearing to determine whether Calvin Yang misrepresented himself — while misrepresenting itself to me. If ASUC cannot accurately represent its own authority, how can it possibly claim the credibility to judge someone else’s alleged misrepresentation?

More broadly, this moment poses a serious threat to press freedom on campus.

I am protected by the First Amendment, which shields journalists from being compelled to testify, particularly in cases where doing so could expose confidential sources. But while I am outside ASUC’s jurisdiction, student journalists at UC Berkeley are not. And that’s what deeply concerns me.

I've reached out to the editors of The Daily Californian, UC Berkeley’s student-run newspaper. If ASUC believes it can invent subpoena powers, my concern for the Daily Cal is what’s to stop ASUC from forcing a Daily Cal journalist to testify next — or reveal sources under threat of disciplinary action? I'm waiting to hear back from the editors for a response.

That creates a chilling effect, not just on student media, but on the very idea of independent journalism on campus. This must be stopped — not just to protect individual journalists, but to preserve the principles of free speech, press freedom, and accountability.

To that end:

• I have submitted a formal complaint to Sunny Lee, Dean of Students at UC Berkeley.

• I’ve copied Vice Chancellor Steve Sutton on the complaint.

• And I plan to file a formal report with the IRS regarding ASUC’s potential misuse of its 501(c)(3) nonprofit status.

I am also considering escalation to the University of California Office of General Counsel.

Political disagreement is part of student governance. Public accountability is part of leadership. But inventing legal powers to intimidate journalists — that’s something else entirely.

I will continue reporting on this story. But I urge UC Berkeley’s leadership, its students, and its journalists to speak up. Because when student government begins behaving like a court, and journalists become its targets, the stakes go far beyond student politics.

They go straight to the heart of our democracy.

--Linton Johnson

OVIS Founder