Identity of Speakers
-
Plaintiffs
Student
OtherStudents, educators, and a librarian who argued that Mississippi’s DEI ban violated their constitutional rights by censoring classroom discussions and restricting academic freedom.
Additional Information
-
Incident Nature:
Lawsuit
Other
-
Incident Political Orientation:
Not Clear -
Incident Responses:
Litigation
State Campus Free Speech Act
-
Incident Status:
In litigation Federal District Court
- Was Speech Code incident
Summary
In June 2025, the ACLU of Mississippi, the Mississippi Center for Justice, the Mississippi Association of Educators, and other groups filed a lawsuit challenging House Bill 1193, a new state law banning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in public schools and universities. The plaintiffs included students, faculty, and a public school librarian who argued that the law violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments by suppressing constitutionally protected speech and encouraging censorship. They contended that the law’s vague and overbroad language chilled classroom discussions, undermined academic freedom, and deterred educators and public employees from addressing issues of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, or national origin. Educators faced unclear but severe consequences for perceived violations, including loss of funding, dismissal, or expulsion.
The law went into effect on July 1, prohibiting DEI offices, training sessions, and related initiatives, and barring instruction on so-called “divisive concepts,” such as the notion that individuals are inherently racist or oppressive based on race or sex. Its passage prompted immediate disruption at universities across Mississippi. Jackson State University ended funding for an educational institute, Mississippi State University’s LGBTQ+ student group disbanded after losing support, Tougaloo College halted longstanding LGBTQ+ programs, and a librarian at Hinds Community College said she felt unable to recommend books addressing race or gender identity.
On July 20, U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate issued a 14-day temporary restraining order halting enforcement of the law. Wingate cited credible evidence that the statute had already harmed Mississippi’s education system and noted its chilling effect on speech. He wrote that HB 1193 “casts a pall of orthodoxy over the Mississippi education system” and required immediate judicial intervention.
Plaintiffs indicated they would continue pursuing a permanent injunction, arguing that the law constituted an unconstitutional attempt to police ideas and restrict open discourse in education. The restraining order allowed public schools and universities to continue operating DEI offices and programs until a preliminary injunction hearing scheduled for August 3.
In early September, additional universities took further action by halting funding for student organizations and programs that promoted DEI initiatives. Administrators cited the law’s restrictions as the reason, expressing concern about potential legal repercussions for supporting these groups. The Institutions of Higher Learning, the board that governs the state’s public universities, clarified that student activity fees—though collected from students’ tuition—are considered state money and must be used in a viewpoint- and content-neutral manner. As a result, universities like the University of Mississippi suspended disbursement of these funds to student organizations and began organizing activities themselves using the fees.
Later in September, Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch filed an appeal against the federal judge’s decision to block portions of the DEI law. The case is now set to be reviewed by a three-judge panel on the conservative 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
