Campbell v. Columbia University School of Professional Studies

Background

Jody-Ann Campbell, appearing without a lawyer, sued Columbia University School of Professional Studies (SPS) and Columbia University’s Office of the President. She alleged that she applied for admission to SPS’s Negotiation and Conflict Resolution Program and for Columbia’s Impact HBCU Fellowship. She was admitted to the SPS program but was not selected for the fellowship.

Campbell alleged that the fellowship decision violated her First Amendment free-speech rights and that she was discriminated against because she is a Jamaican immigrant. She also alleged that the fellowship decision and the lack of financial aid caused severe emotional and physical distress. Her complaint invoked the First Amendment, the Equal Educational Opportunities Act, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. She also asserted state-law claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, false advertising, reckless endangerment, and negligence in supervising a financial-aid office. She sought $1 million, readmission with a scholarship, a box of cookies and a glass of milk from her admissions counselor, and clarification of the fellowship’s selection criteria.

First Amendment and Section 1983 Claims

Campbell brought her First Amendment claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal statute that permits claims against people acting under state authority. The court explained that private parties generally are not liable under Section 1983 and that a private entity’s conduct qualifies as state action only under specific tests involving state coercion or control, joint activity with the state, or performance of a function delegated by the state.

The court held that, in providing higher education, Columbia University SPS and the Office of the President were not engaged in state action under those tests. The court therefore dismissed Campbell’s Section 1983 claims alleging First Amendment violations and stated that she should not reassert those claims in an amended complaint.

Equal Educational Opportunities Act

The Equal Educational Opportunities Act prohibits a state from denying equal educational opportunity based on race, color, sex, or national origin. The court held that the Act did not apply because Columbia University is a private institution rather than a public institution operated by a state or local entity. Campbell therefore failed to state a claim under the Act against the defendants, and the court stated that she should not reassert those claims in an amended complaint.

Title VI

Title VI prohibits intentional discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in a program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Campbell alleged that she was denied the fellowship because she is a Jamaican immigrant. The court held that this bare assertion was insufficient because Campbell did not provide facts suggesting that her national origin affected the decision. For example, she did not allege that she had provided Columbia information about her Jamaican national origin, that the defendants had mentioned it, or facts about the national origins of other fellowship applicants or recipients.

The court permitted Campbell to amend her complaint to allege additional facts that could support a Title VI national-origin-discrimination claim.

Diversity Jurisdiction and State-Law Claims

Campbell also invoked diversity jurisdiction, which generally requires parties to be citizens of different states and requires more than $75,000 to be at stake. The court stated that Columbia University is a New York citizen because it is located in New York. Campbell listed a Pennsylvania address and alleged that she was homeless and staying with an associate there, but the court found it unclear whether Pennsylvania was her legal domicile or only a temporary place of residence. She therefore had not shown that the parties were citizens of different states.

Campbell sought $1 million, but the court noted that it was unclear what portion represented punitive damages and that punitive damages are unavailable for some claims under New York law unless heightened circumstances are shown. Because Campbell might be able to plead facts establishing diversity jurisdiction, the court granted leave to amend to identify her domicile, show that she is not a citizen of the same state as any defendant, and establish the required amount in controversy. The order did not separately decide the merits of the state-law claims.

Disposition

The court granted Campbell 60 days to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint had to replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint and had to include all facts and claims she wanted the court to consider. The court warned that failure to comply could result in dismissal for failure to state a claim. No summons would issue at that time.

The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying appeal fees. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order on October 21, 2022.