Qaddumi v. Hartzell

In June 13, 2025, Ammer Qaddumi, a University of Texas at Austin student who was suspended following his participation in pro-Palestinian protests in April 2024, filed a federal lawsuit in the Western District of Texas against the University of Texas at Austin, its interim president, and other officials, alleging violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments arising from the university’s response to campus protest activity and resulting disciplinary actions. The complaint alleges that university officials engaged in viewpoint discrimination and retaliation against protected speech in connection with protest activity organized by the Palestine Solidarity Committee.

In April 2024, the Palestine Solidarity Committee at the University of Texas at Austin organized sit-ins, marches, and an encampment urging the university to divest from companies linked to Israel. On the night of April 23, 2024, university officials ordered the planned protest cancelled, citing concerns that organizers’ messaging and social media posts suggested potential encampments and campus disruption, including references to “occupation” tactics observed at other universities. Despite the cancellation directive, demonstrations proceeded on April 24, 2024, and again on April 29, 2024, when university police and state troopers dispersed the protests, arresting more than 130 students and using crowd-control measures including pepper spray and flash bangs. Among those arrested was Qaddumi, who had attempted to mediate between protesters and law enforcement. While many charges were later dropped, the university initiated disciplinary proceedings against several students, including probation and suspension.

Following internal university proceedings, a disciplinary panel initially recommended a deferred suspension for Qaddumi, but the administration appealed the outcome. In October 2024, Qaddumi was formally suspended through August 15, 2025, a sanction that barred him from attending classes, accessing campus, or earning academic credit. His lawsuit sought damages and injunctive relief to prevent further disciplinary action, but the court did not intervene to halt the suspension while the case proceeded.

In June 2025, a federal judge ruled that Qaddumi’s First Amendment claims could proceed, finding that he had plausibly alleged viewpoint discrimination and retaliation, and allowing claims against university officials in their official capacities to move forward. Although the litigation continued, Qaddumi’s suspension remained in effect at that time.

On April 14, 2026, the court denied the university’s motion for summary judgment, holding that genuine disputes of material fact precluded judgment as a matter of law and that a reasonable jury could find viewpoint discrimination or retaliation rather than constitutionally permissible time, place, and manner regulation. The court also rejected the university’s mootness argument, crediting the claim that the ongoing disciplinary record constitutes a continuing injury with potential future consequences.  Thee case is now expected to proceed to trial later in 2026.