Canel v. School of the Art Institute of Chicago

Canel alleged that her experience at SAIC began with discriminatory treatment during the admissions process, which she contended improperly focused on her Israeli identity rather than her academic qualifications. She further alleged that after initially being denied admission, SAIC reversed its decision and admitted her, acknowledging that the initial process did not comply with institutional standards. She claimed that once enrolled, she encountered hostile treatment in academic settings, particularly in coursework and classroom discussions addressing Israel, Gaza, and the ongoing conflict, and that she reported these concerns to faculty and administrators without effective corrective action.

The complaint also placed these allegations within a broader campus context of heightened political expression concerning the Israel–Hamas war and Israel’s military operations in Gaza, including criticism of Israel’s conduct during the conflict. Canel alleged that this surrounding environment contributed to hostility toward her as an Israeli student and that SAIC failed to adequately distinguish protected political expression from discriminatory conduct, thereby allowing a hostile educational atmosphere to persist in violation of Title VI.

On March 19, 2026, the court dismissed the second amended complaint. It held that much of the conduct described in the complaint constituted protected expression under the First Amendment and could not support institutional liability under Title VI. The court further concluded that Canel failed to plausibly allege harassment that was severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive, and that the allegations largely reflected exposure to political speech rather than actionable discriminatory conduct directed at her. It also found that the complaint did not adequately plead deliberate indifference by SAIC.