Heilrayne, et al v. University of Texas at Austin

Summary

The American‑Arab Anti‑Discrimination Committee, with co‑counsel including the Muslim Legal Fund of America, Webber Law, and Project TAHA, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on April 30, 2025, on behalf of four current and former University of Texas at Austin students: Arwyn Heilrayne, Citlalli Soto‑Ferate, Iliana Medrano, and Mia Cisco. The complaint named the University of Texas at Austin, the Board of Regents, Texas Governor Greg Abbott, former UT Austin President Jay Hartzell, and officers from the University of Texas Police Department and the Texas Department of Public Safety as defendants. Plaintiffs alleged that the defendants orchestrated mass arrests, used physical intimidation, and imposed retaliatory disciplinary actions against peaceful pro‑Palestinian protesters, violating the First Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The events giving rise to the lawsuit began on April 24, 2024, when students and supporters organized a pro‑Palestinian demonstration on campus. Officers responded in riot gear and arrested dozens of protesters. According to the complaint, law enforcement tackled students, tightened zip ties causing bruises and numbness, and forcibly removed a Muslim student’s head covering. All criminal charges from the April 24 protest were later dropped for lack of probable cause.

After the arrests, the university took disciplinary actions against students involved in the protests during April and May 2024. The complaint described these sanctions as punitive measures imposed after criminal charges were dismissed, and said they included academic holds, suspensions, and threats of harsher sanctions if students did not accept the outcomes. According to the lawsuit, some students were placed on probation, others were suspended for periods such as two years, and officials withheld diplomas or transcripts and threatened suspension unless students participated in disciplinary hearings and agreed in writing to follow revised “Speech, Expression and Assembly” rules. These disciplinary actions followed allegations that protesters violated institutional rules, including unauthorized use of amplified sound, masking to conceal identity, and disrupting learning.

In January 2026, a federal court allowed the core First Amendment claims to proceed, denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss those claims. The court found that the allegations of viewpoint‑based retaliation were plausible and required further examination, permitting continued litigation of the case.