The Cavalier Daily joined 39 other collegiate news organizations and 15 student editors from across the country in signing an amicus brief Sept. 2 in support of eight University of Alabama students in a federal lawsuit over the closure of two student-run magazines — Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six.
Alice is a magazine that describes itself as a “fashion and wellness magazine that serves the students of the University of Alabama,” while Nineteen Fifty-Six is a publication “focused on Black culture, Black excellence and Black student experiences at the University of Alabama.”
An amicus brief is a legal document submitted by individuals or organizations in support of a party in a lawsuit. The brief was filed Sept. 2 by the Student Press Law Center alongside the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, Associated Collegiate Press, College Media Association and the Society of Professional Journalists.
By signing the amicus brief, The Cavalier Daily is supporting the brief’s argument that student journalists and their publications are protected by the First Amendment and that public universities should not exercise control over independent student media.
Leigh Bailey, editor-in-chief of The Cavalier Daily and fourth-year College student, said the SPLC contacted her about signing onto the brief. During her decision-making process, Bailey said she consulted The Cavalier Daily’s Managing Board, which agreed to support the amicus brief based on the newspaper’s principles regarding First Amendment rights for student journalists.
“I strongly believe that no matter the medium — whether you’re a literature magazine, an identity magazine, a general newspaper, a creative forum at a university — that your First Amendment rights should be protected as a student creator,” Bailey said.
The brief urges the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit to reverse a lower court decision in Pointer v. Phelps. The University of Alabama suspended the two student-run magazines — Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six — in December 2025, arguing the publications’ focus on women and Black students raised concerns under federal anti-discrimination requirements.
Eight students subsequently sued the University of Alabama in March, arguing that the closures constituted viewpoint discrimination and violated their First Amendment rights. The students are represented by attorneys from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the ACLU of Alabama, Arnold & Porter LLP — a multinational law firm — and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The University of Alabama has since argued that it did not censor the publications’ viewpoints, but instead made an administrative decision about which university-sponsored student media programs it would support. University of Alabama officials have also argued that the publications could be considered “university speech” because of the financial aid and logistical support they have received.
The University of Alabama’s relationship with the publications differs from The Cavalier Daily’s relationship with the University of Virginia. The Cavalier Daily is financially independent from the University and operates through advertising and donations. By contrast, Alabama’s student media system provided the magazines with university funding and support, which the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama considered in evaluating whether the publication constituted “university speech.”
According to the Pointer v. Phelps lawsuit, editors and contributors from Alice and Nineteen Fifty-Six were called to a meeting Dec. 1 with University of Alabama administrators — who told them the university would suspend their student-run publications indefinitely.
The lawsuit states that the administrators cited the July 2025 memorandum issued by former U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi — which provides guidance for institutions receiving federal funding on programs that may involve “unlawful discrimination,” including those labeled as Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs. The memorandum offers “non-binding suggestions” but includes language regarding organizations that could function as “unlawful proxies” for discrimination. University of Alabama officials have argued that the magazines’ focus on particular racial and gender identities created legal risks under the memorandum.
On May 22, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama denied the students’ request for a preliminary injunction. A preliminary injunction is an order that temporarily requires a party to stop taking an action while a case proceeds. In this case, the students sought to have the magazines restored while the lawsuit continued. Instead, the court found that it was unlikely to establish that the University violated their First Amendment rights.
The students appealed the May 22 decision to the 11th Circuit Court in June.
The amicus brief argues that the district court’s decision conflicts with decades of legal precedent protecting student media at public institutions. The brief further warns that allowing universities to classify student publications as government speech could give public universities greater authority over publications that receive university funding or other institutional support.
“If a public university’s funding, branding and infrastructure are enough to convert student journalism into government speech, then every student newspaper at every public college in America is government speech,” the brief states.
The amicus brief also argues that such a ruling could have a broader “chilling effect” on student journalists who report on controversial issues, criticize university politics and investigate their own institutions. Bailey agreed with the brief’s argument and said that allowing universities to shut down publications based on their content could create uncertainty for student journalists about what they can safely report on.
“Every editorial a student writes, every investigation a student reporter pursues … and every opinion a student columnist expresses would belong not to the student but to the state,” the brief states. “That is not what the First Amendment means, and no court has ever held otherwise — until now.”
Bailey said she is concerned that the decision could affect publications beyond the University of Alabama, particularly identity-focused publications and smaller student outlets. Although Bailey leads a campus-wide student newspaper that covers the University community broadly, she said different types of student publications provide students with outlets that may not be available through a university’s general newspaper.
The Cavalier Daily signed in support of the amicus brief but did not draft the brief or participate in the lawsuit as a legal party. However, Bailey said she hopes the brief will draw additional attention to the case and encourage student journalists across the country to learn about and advocate for the Alabama students.
“The Cavalier Daily, as an institution, tries to spotlight a variety of viewpoints, and therefore, the institution rarely takes political stances,” Bailey said. “However, in this case … we are seeing [our] decision as … based on the principle, rather than a solely political move of the paper.”
Under the leadership of Naima Sawaya, former editor-in-chief and class of 2026 alumna, The Cavalier Daily signed onto another amicus brief in October 2025 supporting The Stanford Daily in a separate federal lawsuit.
The University of Alabama students’ appeal of Pointer v. Phelps remains pending before the 11th Circuit.
Jaylynn Perez is a third-year College student from Chesapeake, Va., majoring in Government and minoring in Public Policy and Leadership in the Batten School. She currently serves as news senior associate editor and video staffer. She frequently covers topics such as student self-governance organizations, University governance and local politics.
Read More
Student Council considers creating an ad hoc committee to review UBE proceedings
By Lucia Gambacini | 18 hours agoConsideration of the bill was postponed until the next general body meeting.
Health System Board Finance Working Group passes remote participation policy
By Lily Kostro | 18 hours agoThe policy states that a member of HSB may participate remotely in meetings not open to the public, provided the member notifies the rector that they are unable to attend in-person due to an emergency, personal matters or a disability.
Less than three months out — what’s on the ballot this November in Virginia?
By Abigail Larkin | 18 hours agoHere is a closer look at what is on the ballot this November in Virginia’s elections for the U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives and amendments to the Virginia Constitution.
