A group of University of Alabama students filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday, challenging the university’s suspension of two student publications.
The university permanently suspended and revoked funding from student publications Nineteen Fifty-Six and Alice magazine in December of last year.
Founded in 2020, Nineteen Fifty-Six was a biannual student-run magazine “focused on Black culture, Black excellence, and Black student experiences at The University of Alabama.” The publication was named after the year the first Black student to attend UA, Autherine Lucy Foster, enrolled in the university.
Alice was a lifestyle, fashion and wellness magazine that produced content primarily targeted toward university women since its launch in 2015.
The eight student plaintiffs, who served or planned to serve as editors or contributing writers for the publications, argue the university unlawfully censored disfavored student voices and perspectives by shuttering the student magazines.
Students are represented by the Legal Defense Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
In their complaint filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, against UA President Pro Tempore Scott Phelps and the university’s board of trustees, plaintiffs allege the suspensions constitute illegal “viewpoint discrimination.”
“These student magazines—unlike other student publications at the University—were suspended and defunded by UA because UA administrators disfavor their editorial perspectives related to race and gender,” the complaint reads. “Defendants’ suspension of Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six, constitutes unlawful censorship of Plaintiffs’ viewpoints in violation of their rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
University officials have cited a U.S. Department of Justice memo released last July by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi as prompting UA’s decision to close the two publications.
The memo is not legally binding and states that it serves to illustrate “best practices” or “non-binding suggestions to help entities comply with federal antidiscrimination laws and avoid legal pitfalls.”
Both magazines were suspended on the grounds that they engaged in “unlawful proxy discrimination,” which the DOJ memo describes as a federally funded entity using “ostensibly neutral criteria” that serve to advantage a particular race, sex or other protected characteristics.
The plaintiffs, however, highlight that the Bondi memo does not directly apply to the content of university publications. The complaint goes on to cite the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the University of Virginia, which held the university could not withhold funding to a student publication because of its content.
“Defendants have a constitutional obligation not to engage in viewpoint discrimination against their students, even when the forum is one of its own creation,” the memo reads. “The Bondi Memo does not reference, in any way, this constitutional obligation.”
The complaint also highlights 2025 guidance from the U.S. Department of Education that promoted similar interpretations of anti-discrimination guidance was successfully challenged in three lawsuits with three federal courts enjoining the guideline’s enforcement. Unlike the Bondi memo, the Department of Education guidance imposed explicit requirements upon federal grant recipients.
In a series of statements released by the LDF and SPLC on Monday, students and attorneys involved in the case decried the publication closures.
Student plaintiff, Rihanna Pointer, who served as multimedia editor for Nineteen Fifty-Six, condemned the publication shutdowns as censorship, while arguing against the university’s claim that the magazines exhibited discriminatory hiring practices.
“I believe that freedom of expression on campus should neither be censored nor restricted because of its perceived value or audience,” said student plaintiff, Rihanna Pointer.
“Nineteen Fifty-Six and Alice have always provided a platform for diverse voices and perspectives that are vital for fostering an inclusive community amongst students on campus, and I have always advocated for diversity of thought and representation through my writing. That’s why I believe that the University’s suspension of the magazines must be reversed,” Pointer added.
Gabrielle Gunter, former editor-in-chief of Alice, argued that university discriminated against the students involved in the magazines based on the views expressed in their content.
“The ability to create and contribute to spaces that amplify the voices of college students who hold identities that are typically not reflected in campus media is not only important but necessary work,” Gunter said. “Marginalized students deserve the opportunity to participate in magazines and have access to the same resources and support that other publications have to create opportunities for engagement, discussion, and exploration on a wide array of issues.”
“Discrimination based on the views of students who seek to create inclusive media for all students has no place in our society, so it’s really important to me to keep fighting for what is right,” she added.
LDF assistant counsel Avatara Smith-Carrington described the university’s decision to suspend the publications as “discriminatory and unconstitutional.”
“Student magazines like Nineteen Fifty-Six and Alice provide students with a critical space to explore culture, build community, bridge divides, and reflect on their lived and shared experiences,” Carrington said.
“The First Amendment protects the rights of students to write, publish, and engage in dialogue about the issues that shape their lives, free from viewpoint discrimination. Silencing these students sends a troubling message that certain student voices and experiences don’t belong on campus,” the attorney continued.
SPLC senior supervising attorney Sam Boyd stated that UA students “deserve the right to freely express themselves, including their viewpoints shaped by their experiences as women and Black people.”
“Their lived experiences are valid, important to the fabric of this country’s history and should be shared without interference,” Boyd said. “The suspension of Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six not only disenfranchises marginalized communities, but it signals a return to the darkest times in our nation’s history.”
ACLU of Alabama Legal Director Alison Mollman described the magazine suspensions as “the University of Alabama’s latest attack on students’ First Amendment rights of free speech and free association.”
“In bringing this litigation, we are proud to stand alongside student editors and contributors,” Mollman said. “We urge the court to enforce First Amendment protections for students at the University of Alabama by reversing the suspensions and restoring our clients’ rights to publish their magazines.”
UA Associate Director of Communications Alex House declined to comment on the lawsuit.
An online petition, demanding the reinstatement of Nineteen Fifty-Six and Alice, has reached more than 3,000 signatures since launching in December.
A fundraiser launched by UA student publications alumni has also raised nearly $29,000 for the production of spring semester magazine issues by former Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six staff.
