The lawsuit makes 11 claims alleging that the University’s response violated the protesters' rights under multiple constitutional amendments and sections of the North Carolina Constitution.
The First Amendment claims allege that the University’s response to the encampment stopped individuals from and punished them for peacefully assembling in a traditional public forum. The lawsuit also alleges that the University engaged in viewpoint discrimination by responding to the encampment with more hostility than shown toward previous protests.
“That's really the main amendment that separates us from a democracy to a dictatorship,” Emancipate NC Staff Attorney Jaelyn Miller said.
Another First Amendment claim alleges that when the University banned the plaintiffs from campus, it hindered their abilities to engage in political speech on campus.
The Fourteenth Amendment claim alleges that the University failed to properly notify demonstrators that not dispersing from the encampment would result in legal and academic disciplinary actions, denying the protesters’ rights to due process and opportunity to be heard.
The Fourth Amendment claims allege that police unlawfully arrested protesters engaging in protected speech without probable cause. During Rogers’ arrest, the lawsuit alleges that police used excessive force, resulting in the plaintiff tearing her rotator cuff.
The North Carolina Constitution claims also allege that the University violated protesters' freedom of speech and right to due process. Miller said the suit includes these state constitutional claims because universities can have sovereign immunity in federal court.
The lawsuit also alleges specific police officer defendants of battery and unlawful arrest.
Community involvement
In a statement to The Daily Tar Heel, UNC Media Relations wrote that the University is aware of the lawsuit.
“We are committed to upholding the rights and responsibilities of all members of our community and remain dedicated to fostering an inclusive and respectful environment,” Media Relations wrote.
UNC Students for Justice in Palestine wrote in a statement to The DTH that it was thankful to see the lawsuit be filed.
To get the day's news and headlines in your inbox each morning, sign up for our email newsletters.
“The future of free speech and assembly in the United States hinges on the outcome of lawsuits related to the unfair punishment of students protesting the Israeli genocide,” SJP wrote.
Before bringing this lawsuit, Miller worked on the defense team for all 39 arrested protesters, 25 of whom accepted plea deals. The remaining demonstrators had their charges dropped.
Subei helped students who were suspended by the EEAC to discuss a resolution with the University. All students aside from Mohanarajah resolved their matters with the University, she said.
“Attorneys from these organizations have played a critical role in defending against criminal and university conduct cases student protesters have faced,” SJP wrote.
Miller said that once she and Subei were no longer working on these cases, they decided to see if there were any individuals involved in the protest who wanted to sue UNC civilly. Miller and Subei then brought on the NC ACLU to strengthen their legal team.
National circumstances and future steps
The University is currently involved in lawsuits with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights for both antisemitic and anti-Palestinian discrimination.
“Those are not going to have the sort of immediate relief that we are asking for on behalf of these plaintiffs,” ACLU of NC Staff Attorney Ivy Johnson said.
The First Amendment claims are at the center of the lawsuit when considering it in a broader national context of pro-Palestine protest response, Miller said. On March 8, President Donald Trump’s administration arrested and moved to deport Columbia University student and Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, although a judge blocked deportation efforts. Khalil is currently still detained.
Subei said the Trump administration is engaging in ideological targeting towards groups that disagree with the government. She said she hopes this lawsuit serves as a reminder that the government can’t target groups and individuals based on their viewpoints.
“That dissent and disagreement with the government is actually entitled to the highest levels of protection,” Subei said.
The lawsuit is seeking a preliminary injunction from the court that would order the University to lift the plaintiffs' bans, Johnson said, allowing the individuals to return to campus while the lawsuit progresses.
Now that the lawsuit has been filed, the University must respond to the complaint. Miller said she expects their response will come in the form of a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
Miller said she thinks the lawsuit will take 2 to 3 years to resolve.
Johnson said that while the lawsuit seeks to provide relief to the plaintiffs, she hopes it also sets a precedent of recognizing the rights of students and community members engaged in protected speech on campus.
“The hope is that UNC doesn't do this ever again in recognition of these important rights,” Johnson said.
@alice__scottt
@dailytarheel | university@dailytarheel.com
