Legal Battles Arise From Pro-Palestine Protests at UT Austin

The University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin) finds itself embroiled in legal challenges stemming from pro-Palestine protests that took place on campus in April 2024. These lawsuits allege violations of students' First Amendment rights and raise questions about the university's response to demonstrations.

Lawsuit Filed by ADC

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) filed a lawsuit on April 30, 2025, against UT Austin, Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Former UT Austin President Jay Hartzell, current Interim President Jim Davis, and officers of the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) and the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS). The lawsuit alleges that state officials, UT Austin leadership, and law enforcement orchestrated mass arrests and imposed retaliatory disciplinary actions against peaceful pro-Palestine protesters.

The ADC's complaint details instances where officers allegedly arrested students without probable cause and employed aggressive crowd-control tactics. These tactics reportedly included tackling students, using zip-ties so tightly that they caused bruising and numbness, and forcibly removing a Muslim student’s hijab.

Abed Ayoub, ADC National Executive Director, stated, “When state and university officials respond to student organizing with arrests and punishment, they’re not just targeting a single protest-they’re trying to intimidate a generation into silence. These students showed extraordinary courage in standing against genocide.”

Court Ruling

In a ruling on the ADC case, the court partially granted and partially denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss. However, the court allowed core First Amendment claims to proceed, rejecting efforts by state officials and university leadership to end the case at the earliest stage.

Jenin Younes, ADC National Legal Director, emphasized the significance of the ruling: “This ruling is an important step toward holding government officials accountable for arresting and punishing students for engaging in protected speech. Our Constitution protects peaceful advocacy, especially on matters of public concern, and the court’s decision makes clear that these claims cannot simply be brushed aside before the evidence is examined."

Lawsuit Filed by Students

In a separate legal action, two recent University of Texas at Austin graduates and two current students filed a federal lawsuit against the university over their arrests during an on-campus pro-Palestinian protest in April 2024. The students, Arwyn Heilrayne, Citlalli Soto-Ferate, Iliana Medrano, and Mia Cisco, are also suing the University of Texas System Board of Regents, former UT-Austin President Jay Hartzell, Gov. Greg Abbott, as well as officers for the UT Police Department and the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Christina Jump with the Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA), one of the groups representing the students, stated, “These students committed no crimes but endured violent arrests.” The four students allege they were unlawfully targeted because they expressed pro-Palestinian views and that their First Amendment rights were violated when they faced “unconstitutional restrictions” on their right to protest.

Allegations of Excessive Force and Retaliation

The students allege that violent police tactics during the protests resulted in injuries and trauma, with long-term impacts on their academic and professional endeavors.

Heilrayne recounted an incident where police officers rushed at her and knocked her to the ground while she was observing the protest. She said her arrest “caused significant pain” when officers twisted her arms behind her back to secure her wrists with zip ties. Heilrayne claims she told officers the zip ties were too tight, but they ignored her request to loosen them. She also alleged that she overheard officers discussing a quota of arresting 50 students.

Read also: Guide to UC Davis Student Housing

Medrano, Cisco, and Soto-Ferate also reported injuries sustained during their arrests. Cisco stated that an officer removed her hijab, which she did not get back until she was in jail.

All four plaintiffs said they felt compelled to accept disciplinary actions imposed by UT-Austin in the wake of the protests to avoid harsher penalties or interruptions to their degrees and careers. These disciplinary actions included deferred suspension and academic probation. The students allege that these actions have chilled their speech and affected their opportunities to obtain internships due to the suspensions’ notation in their academic records.

Court's Decision

A judge in the Western District of Texas ruled that the current and former students - Mia Cisco, Arwyn Heilrayne, Iliana Medrano and Citlalli Soto-Ferate - can proceed with their claims against UT System Chairman Kevin Eltife and UT President Jim Davis.

Christina Jump, the students’ attorney, stated, “The courts recognize they have the right to move forward, they have the right to their day in court. They have a chance at redemption.”

In allowing the retaliation claim to proceed, the judge cited the students’ argument that similar protests were held without arrest or disciplinary action and noted that police did not arrest counterprotesters. The judge also found that the students sufficiently proved their reputation, employment, and graduate school opportunities were harmed because of UT’s assigned punishments.

Read also: Investigating the Death at Purdue

Jump emphasized, “These students have the right to exercise their First Amendment-protected rights to free speech, to peacefully protest. When they did that, and when they spoke out in ways that the administration of UT didn’t like, they were retaliated against in the way they were treated by the university and by university officials.”

Evidence and Arguments

The students' lawsuit cites body camera footage of a Texas Department of Public Safety trooper questioning why students were being arrested at the April 24 protest. In the footage, one officer asks, “We’ve been asking this question, but now what are they doing illegal?” Attorneys for the students argue that the footage shows officers were aware the protesters were not breaking the law but proceeded anyway.

The students’ attorney also used Gov. Greg Abbott and UT’s public comments to argue they were directly involved in punishing the students. Jump stated, “They were slammed in the media immediately by these Texas officials, and their pictures were splashed all over a lot of social media. They get the chance to show they are right. They get the chance to show they follow the law.”

University's Response

The university has disputed claims that the April 24 protest was targeted because it was pro-Palestinian and said it supports free speech. Hartzell stated in 2024 that the university enforced their rules on campus while protecting free speech, adding, “Peaceful protests within our rules are acceptable. Breaking our rules and policies and disrupting others’ ability to learn are not allowed. The group that led this protest stated it was going to violate Institutional Rules. Our rules matter, and they will be enforced. Our University will not be occupied.”

Other Legal Challenges

Ammer Qaddumi, another UT student, also claims that the university, President Jay Hartzell, and Provost Sharon Wood wrongfully retaliated against him by threatening him with suspension. Qaddumi’s lawyer, Brian McGiverin, stated, “These were kids who were walking down the sidewalk chanting, ‘Hey, hey, ho, ho, the occupation’s got to go.”

The lawsuit alleges that the university first violated Qaddumi's rights when they told organizers they could not hold the planned demonstration. Despite the university’s directive, dozens of protesters gathered the next day on the South Mall.

Broader Context

These lawsuits are occurring amid a national debate over how public universities have responded to student protests related to the war in Gaza. Steven T. Collis, a clinical professor and director of the Bech-Loughlin First Amendment Center at UT, noted, “What the judge is saying is that there could be facts out there that would allow the plaintiffs to win, so the case needs to move forward to determine what actually happened.”

Collis also commented on Governor Abbott’s social media post stating, “Arrests being made right now & will continue until the crowd disperses. These protesters belong in jail. Antisemitism will not be tolerated in Texas. Period." He said Abbott’s comments could factor into whether the case is viewed as “viewpoint discrimination” tied to their beliefs. Courts may examine whether government actions were driven by neutral safety concerns or by hostility toward a particular political viewpoint.

New State Law and Student Organizations

Adding another layer to the legal complexities at UT Austin, a new state law went into effect in September, prompting a lawsuit from several student organizations, including the Society of Unconventional Drummers (SOUnD). SOUnD and other organizations at UT Austin and UT Dallas filed a lawsuit against the schools' respective presidents, the UT Board of Regents, and UT System Chancellor Dr. John Zerwas over the new state law.

The new state law sharply contrasts a bill Texas legislators passed just six years ago that expanded free speech protections on public university campuses. State Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, the bill's author in 2019, said, “The policy must allow individuals to engage in expressive activities on campus and enable student organizations and faculty to invite speakers to speak on campus."

tags: #ut #austin #student #sues #pro #palestine