By James Berreth 

Editor in Chief 

A legal battle over the University of Alabama’s decision to shut down two student-run magazines has reached a federal appeals court, where student press advocates warn that a lower court ruling could give public universities sweeping authority over independent student journalism. 

Eight University of Alabama students sued university officials in March after the school suspended and defunded Alice Magazine and Nineteen Fifty-Six, publications that primarily focused on women and Black students, respectively. The students argue that the university violated the First Amendment by targeting the magazines because of their editorial focus. 

The case, Pointer v. Phelps, is now before the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after a federal district judge denied the students’ request for a preliminary injunction in May. 

On Sept. 2, the Student Press Law Center led a coalition of journalism and First Amendment organizations in filing an amicus curiae brief urging the appeals court to reverse the lower court’s decision. The coalition argues that the ruling threatens protections that have allowed student journalists at public universities to operate independently of the institutions that fund them. 

The coalition includes the Student Press Law Center, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, Associated Collegiate Press, College Media Association, and Society of Professional Journalists. Forty student newsrooms and 15 individual student editors from colleges across the country also endorsed the brief. 

I am among those supporters. I joined other student editors in supporting the coalition’s argument that the outcome could affect student journalists far beyond the University of Alabama. 

The dispute began in December 2025, when University of Alabama administrators suspended Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six. 

Alice, established in 2015, focused on the experiences and interests of college women. Nineteen Fifty-Six, established in 2020, focused on Black culture, Black excellence, and the experiences of Black students at the university. Its name refers to 1956, when Autherine Lucy Foster became the first Black student to enroll at the University of Alabama. Despite their editorial focuses, both publications were open to students of all races and genders as editors, contributors, and readers. 

University officials said the publications raised concerns under federal guidance regarding diversity, equity and inclusion programs. 

The university cited a July 2025 memorandum issued by then-U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi that provided guidance to recipients of federal funding regarding programs that could violate federal anti-discrimination laws. The nonbinding memo warned against the use of what it described as “unlawful proxies” – seemingly neutral criteria that effectively substitute for explicit consideration of protected characteristics such as race or sex, and university officials applied that reasoning to the magazines because of their target audiences. 

The students challenging the closures argue that the Justice Department memo neither required nor justified shutting down publications based on the subjects they covered or the communities they primarily served. The complaint alleges that the university instead engaged in viewpoint discrimination by eliminating publications whose editorial missions centered on race and gender. 

The students are represented by attorneys from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, and Southern Poverty Law Center. 

The University of Alabama has defended its decision as an effort to redirect resources toward a new publication open to a broader range of students and subjects. The university has maintained that it did not censor individual students or prevent them from expressing their views. 

That argument received a significant boost on May 22 when U.S. District Judge Edmund G. LaCour Jr. denied the students’ motion for a preliminary injunction. LaCour concluded that the students had not demonstrated they were likely to succeed on their First Amendment claims. His ruling found, in part, that the university’s decision about whether to operate the magazines could be considered government speech and that the First Amendment did not require the university to continue funding publications it had voluntarily created. 

The court also determined that the closures could be viewed as content-based rather than viewpoint-based decisions. According to the ruling, the university could choose to replace two narrowly focused magazines with a general-interest publication without necessarily prohibiting students from expressing the viewpoints that previously appeared in Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six. 

The Student Press Law Center argues that reasoning represents a dangerous departure from decades of First Amendment precedent involving college journalism. 

The organization says treating student publications as government speech simply because a public university provides funding, facilities, or institutional support could fundamentally alter the relationship between student journalists and university administrators. 

“What the 11th Circuit decides here will reach far beyond the University of Alabama, either securing or chilling student media at public colleges across the region,” SPLC Executive Director Gary Green said in announcing the amicus brief. 

The distinction between student speech and government speech sits at the heart of the appeal. 

If student journalism supported by a public university constitutes government speech, First Amendment restrictions on university interference could be significantly weakened. Administrators could potentially claim greater authority to decide what publications exist and what subjects university-supported media may cover. 

The SPLC-led coalition argues that such an interpretation conflicts with decades of legal precedent recognizing student media at public colleges as forums for student expression rather than official mouthpieces for the government. 

That issue is particularly notable at the University of Alabama because the university’s own Media Planning Board charter designated student media as public forums for discussion of ideas and issues on campus. The charter also recognized editorial freedom, freedom from censorship and prior restraint, and protections against removing student editors because administrators or others disagreed with their editorial policies or content. 

The amicus brief argues that allowing universities to characterize student journalism as government speech because an institution provides money or infrastructure could affect virtually every public college newspaper, magazine, and other student news organization receiving institutional support. 

The coalition also points to Alabama’s place in the history of college press freedom. A 1967 federal case involving Troy State College, now Troy University, helped establish constitutional protections for student journalists at public colleges. The SPLC argues that the district court’s ruling in Pointer departs sharply from that history. 

For student news organizations such as The Metropolitan, the implications extend beyond the specific editorial missions of Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six. 

Student newspapers routinely investigate and report on the same universities that provide them with funding, office space, equipment, or other institutional resources. Those stories can include criticism of university presidents, governing boards, spending decisions, campus safety, faculty conduct, and other controversial subjects. 

The SPLC coalition argues that if university support transforms student journalism into government speech, administrators could gain significantly greater control over publications that are supposed to scrutinize those same institutions. 

The students filed their notice of appeal in June, seeking to overturn the district court’s denial of the preliminary injunction. The Sept. 2 amicus brief asks the 11th Circuit to reverse the lower court and preserve the distinction between independent student journalism and speech produced by the government itself. 

Although the case directly concerns two magazines at one university, the SPLC says the legal question is much larger. 

A decision affirming the lower court could establish precedent within the 11th Circuit, which covers Alabama, Florida and Georgia, and could influence future disputes over university control of student media elsewhere in the country. 

For the student journalists and press freedom organizations supporting the appeal, the question is ultimately whether accepting university resources gives administrators ownership over the journalism students produce – or whether the First Amendment protects student journalists’ independence even when their university pays the bills.