A legal dispute over the selection process for Yale University’s board of trustees is set to escalate as plaintiffs Victor Ashe and Donald Glascoff seek to bring their case before the Connecticut Supreme Court. Both individuals, alumni of the class of 1967, initiated their legal action against the Yale Corporation in 2022, challenging changes to the nomination process for trustees.
The controversy began when Yale eliminated the petitioning process that allowed alumni to nominate candidates for the board. Ashe, who previously qualified for a 2021 election through this method, expressed significant concern over the implications of this change. In a phone interview, Ashe stated, “What was done was fundamentally undemocratic. Yale stands for lux et veritas. Light and truth. There’s no light if the nominating process is abolished.”
Ashe and Glascoff filed their petition for certification to the Connecticut Supreme Court on December 19, 2025, after lower courts ruled against them. The plaintiffs argue that both the district and appellate courts misinterpreted the law when they concluded that Yale’s actions were legally appropriate. Yale has until January 28, 2026, to respond to the petition.
Background of the Case
In May 2021, Yale announced the termination of the petitioning process, citing that it no longer served the best interests of the university. Catharine Bond Hill, a former senior trustee, noted that the method, in place since 1929, had seen little use until recent years. She argued that it often led to financially burdensome candidacies, which could deter qualified alumni from seeking election.
Prior to the changes, an alumnus could petition for nomination a year before an election, requiring at least 3 percent of eligible alumni signatures—approximately 4,394 signatures for the 2021 election. The more common pathway was through the Yale Alumni Association’s nominating committee, which comprises volunteer alumni leaders. Traditionally, candidates do not campaign publicly for nominations.
Ashe and Glascoff’s initial complaint contends that Yale violated the Connecticut Revised Nonstock Corporation Act, which allows members of nonstock corporations to contest actions exceeding the corporation’s power. Their argument hinges on the assertion that alumni, as voters for the board, qualify as members under this law.
Ashe and Glascoff also claim a breach of the 1872 amendment of the University Charter, which allows graduate voting under regulations set by the university. Their complaint posits that while Yale can regulate voting procedures, it cannot restrict whom alumni may vote for or who may stand as candidates. “The Corporation is engaging in the most obvious form of voter suppression and denial of rights of free expression of opinion,” stated Eric Henzy, the plaintiffs’ attorney.
Judicial Proceedings and Future Steps
On September 19, 2022, Ashe and Glascoff presented their case in Hartford district court. On February 26, 2024, Judge John Burns Farley ruled in favor of Yale, stating that the university has the right to manage alumni elections as it sees fit. The judge also determined that Ashe lacked standing to sue, as he was neither a member of the Yale Corporation under the relevant statute nor a third-party beneficiary of the University Charter.
Following this ruling, the plaintiffs appealed, but the Connecticut Appellate Court unanimously upheld the lower court’s decision on December 2, 2025. Subsequently, Ashe and Glascoff filed their petition for certification to the state’s highest court. Their petition argues for the restoration of direct nominations for alumni fellows, which they assert is necessary for meaningful choice in the election process.
As the January 28 deadline for Yale’s response approaches, the outcome remains uncertain. Legal expert Alex Taubes LAW ’15 from New Haven remarked, “Based on my evaluation of everything so far, the plaintiffs have a long shot at success. But in the law, you can never say never.”
The ongoing legal battle raises significant questions about the governance of Yale and the rights of its alumni, reflecting broader themes of democracy and representation within educational institutions.
