The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld the dismissal of claims made by Ehiremen Bennard Eriakha against the University of Mississippi and several faculty members. The court ruled that Eriakha's allegations did not sufficiently demonstrate constitutional violations or breach of contract. This decision affects Eriakha and his twin brother, who had both filed lawsuits over academic disputes, and highlights the challenges students face when contesting university decisions.
The case, Eriakha v. University of Mississippi, was filed on September 9, 2026, under docket number 26-60007. The brothers, both doctoral students in the Pharmacy Administration program, faced academic sanctions that they claimed were retaliatory and discriminatory. The court's decision is significant as it clarifies the boundaries of academic freedom and student rights within higher education institutions.
Background
Ehiremen Bennard Eriakha and his twin brother, Omokhodion Alfred Eriakha, are Black international students pursuing doctoral degrees at the University of Mississippi. Their disputes with faculty members arose from issues related to mentoring arrangements, program requirements, and academic sanctions. These disagreements led to two separate lawsuits, which were later consolidated by the district court.
The brothers alleged that their academic downgrades were retaliatory actions taken by faculty after they raised concerns about the university's refusal to provide necessary disability accommodations. The district court dismissed Bennard's claims, leading to the appeal before the Fifth Circuit. Alfred's appeal was dismissed for failure to prosecute, leaving only Bennard's claims to be reviewed.
The Ruling
The Fifth Circuit Court ruled in favor of the University of Mississippi, affirming the district court's dismissal of Bennard's claims. The court stated, "even liberally construed, his allegations do not plausibly transform these academic disputes into constitutional violations." The ruling emphasized that some of Bennard's claims were barred by state sovereign immunity, which protects state institutions from being sued in federal court.
The court noted that the district court had properly declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law contract claims. The judges on the panel included Jones, Southwick, and Willett, with Willett authoring the opinion. The court made a minor correction regarding the dismissal of sovereign-immunity claims, stating that such dismissals must be without prejudice.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for students and academic institutions. It reinforces the legal protections afforded to universities under sovereign immunity, limiting the ability of students to challenge academic decisions in federal court. The court's decision also clarifies that academic disputes must meet a high threshold to be considered constitutional violations.
For students like Ehiremen Bennard, this ruling may deter future claims against universities, as the court's opinion suggests that academic institutions have considerable leeway in managing their programs and faculty-student relationships. The decision does not set a new legal precedent but rather reaffirms existing principles regarding the treatment of academic disputes in the legal system.
What's Next
The possibility of an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court remains, but it is unclear whether the Eriakha brothers will pursue this option. There are currently no related cases pending that could influence the outcome of their situation.