Wright and Admiral v. University of Texas at Dallas
University of Texas System, Abbott, and Other Officials
Campus protest and retaliation case on behalf of two professors arrested at a peaceful encampment.
Wright and Admiral v. University of Texas at Dallas, University of Texas System, Abbott, and Other Officials is a federal constitutional and civil-rights case handled by Jump Start Legal Justice Center. The case alleges that University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) officials, the University of Texas System, and state officials including the governor and attorney general violated the professors’ rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments and related civil-rights statutes when they ordered and carried out arrests at a peaceful campus encampment, then imposed broad and ongoing restrictions on the professors’ access to campus and professional opportunities.
Case descriptions are provided for general information and do not replace the official court record.
Active Cases
Case Name: Wright and Admiral v. University of Texas at Dallas, University of Texas System, Abbott, and Other Officials (caption shortened for readability)
Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Status: Active
Filed: October 2025
Issue Area: Free speech, assembly and protest rights, academic freedom, equal protection, unlawful arrest, retaliation
Clients: Ben Wright and Rosemary Admiral, history professors at the University of Texas at Dallas
Key Rights At Stake: Campus protest rights, protection from retaliation for supporting student speech, equal treatment by state and university officials, protection from arrest without probable cause
Background
In May 2024, students at the University of Texas at Dallas organized a peaceful pro-Palestinian encampment at Chess Plaza, sometimes referred to as the “Gaza Liberation Plaza” encampment. Professors Ben Wright and Rosemary Admiral, both members of the UTD history faculty, were present at the encampment to support their students and help maintain calm.
According to the complaint, as law enforcement officers in riot gear advanced on the encampment, Wright and Admiral positioned themselves between officers and students and attempted to communicate with officials about the students’ concerns and safety. The lawsuit alleges that despite breaking no laws and acting within existing university policies at the time, the professors were arrested and subjected to forceful treatment.
Following the arrests, the suit contends, UTD and state officials imposed broad restrictions on the professors’ access to campus, communications, and professional activities. These restrictions allegedly included near-total bans from campus that were later narrowed only to classroom instruction and limited research activities, along with the cancellation of at least one study abroad program and damage to the professors’ reputations and career prospects.
The professors bring this lawsuit to challenge both the initial arrests and the subsequent restrictions and actions that they allege constitute unconstitutional retaliation for protected speech and association.
Claims And Legal Issues
This case raises questions about how federal constitutional protections apply when public universities and state officials respond to campus protest and faculty support for student speech.
Alleged violations of the First Amendment rights to free speech, assembly, and association, based on arrests and restrictions imposed in response to the professors’ support for a peaceful encampment.
Alleged violations of the Fourth Amendment, based on arrests that the complaint describes as unsupported by probable cause.
Alleged violations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses, including discriminatory or retaliatory treatment and lack of fair process in restrictions imposed after the arrests.
Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and related civil-rights statutes, seeking to hold state and university officials accountable for alleged constitutional violations carried out under color of state law.
Not every argument made in court is listed here. The focus is on the central constitutional and statutory issues.
Procedural History
This case raises questions about how federal constitutional protections apply when public universities and state officials respond to campus protest and faculty support for student speech.
May 1, 2024
The encampment at UTD’s Chess Plaza takes place. Professors Wright and Admiral are arrested while present at the protest and attempting, according to the complaint, to communicate with law enforcement and protect their students.Mid–2024
UTD and state officials allegedly impose broad restrictions on the professors’ ability to access campus and carry out normal professional activities, while no criminal charges are ultimately brought against them.October 2025
The Muslim Legal Fund of America, with Christy Jump as lead counsel, files a 29 page complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas on behalf of Wright and Admiral. The suit names UTD, the University of Texas System, current and former university presidents, the governor, the attorney general, and other officials as defendants and seeks damages and injunctive relief.
Entries are summarized and do not include every filing. For full details, consult the official court docket.
Selected Filings And Orders
Key publicly available filings and court orders in this case may include:
Complaint (filed October 2025):
Initial filing outlining the factual background, alleged constitutional and statutory violations, and relief sought.Subsequent motions and orders:
To be added as the case progresses, such as responses to motions to dismiss, preliminary injunction rulings, or other significant orders.
Oral Arguments
At the time this page copy is prepared, no oral argument recordings are yet publicly available for this case. If the case proceeds to hearings in appellate courts or significant motion hearings with recorded audio or video, links can be added here.
Complaint (filed October 2025):
Initial filing outlining the factual background, alleged constitutional and statutory violations, and relief sought.Subsequent motions and orders:
To be added as the case progresses, such as responses to motions to dismiss, preliminary injunction rulings, or other significant orders.
Any recordings will be hosted by the courts or approved platforms. Links from this site will direct you to those official sources.
Media Coverage And Commentary
Media Coverage And Commentary
The Retrograde
"Professors sue UTD over pro-Palestine encampment arrest, alleging retaliation and rights violations" – article describing the professors’ arrests at a peaceful encampment, the allegations of retaliation and rights violations, and the filing of the federal lawsuit.
The Guardian
"Professors sue UTD over pro-Palestine encampment arrest, alleging retaliation and rights violations" – article describing the professors’ arrests at a peaceful encampment, the allegations of retaliation and rights violations, and the filing of the federal lawsuit.
Why This Case Matters
This case touches on how public universities and state officials respond to peaceful campus protests and to faculty members who stand alongside their students.
How far state and university officials may go in ordering arrests and imposing restrictions when protests are peaceful and faculty act to de escalate
What protections faculty have against retaliation for supporting student speech and assembly
How courts will apply First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment principles in the context of campus encampments and follow on discipline or restrictions
The outcome may influence how universities across the country approach similar protests, how they balance safety concerns with constitutional protections, and what safeguards exist for faculty who support their students’ lawful expression.
Role Of Jump Start Legal Justice Center
Jump Start Legal Justice Center, through Christy Jump, serves as lead counsel for Professors Wright and Admiral in this matter. Christy works with organizational partners and, where applicable, co-counsel to develop the factual record, present arguments in the district court, and coordinate litigation strategy.
Her role includes both courtroom advocacy and collaboration with clients to document the ongoing impact of the challenged actions.
Important Disclaimers
Case descriptions on this site are summaries intended to provide general information about the types of matters handled by the firm. They are not legal advice, and they do not replace the official court docket, filings, or orders.
Past or current case outcomes do not predict results in any other matter
Descriptions may omit details for privacy, confidentiality, or clarity
Reading about a case or contacting the firm about it does not create an attorney client relationship
The outcome may influence how universities across the country approach similar protests, how they balance safety concerns with constitutional protections, and what safeguards exist for faculty who support their students’ lawful expression.
If Your Situation Sounds Similar
If the issues in this case resemble what you or your organization are experiencing – such as arrests or restrictions imposed in response to peaceful protest or support for student speech – a focused review of your specific facts and documents can help determine whether federal court may be appropriate and what options might exist.
This website is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Viewing this site or contacting Jump Start Legal Justice Center does not create an attorney client relationship. No attorney client relationship exists unless and until a written fee agreement is signed. Attorney licensed in Texas. Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.