A student at the University of Michigan has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that she was wrongly accused of using artificial intelligence to write her academic essays, claiming the accusations were rooted in discrimination linked to her disability.
The case, filed last week, identifies the student as “Jane Doe.” Her attorneys argue that university officials and instructors misinterpreted traits associated with her obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and anxiety disorder as signs of AI-generated work. According to the complaint, despite presenting unspecified evidence to demonstrate that she had not used AI tools, she was overruled and ultimately prevented from graduating.
They further claim, “The accusations were based heavily on subjective judgments about Plaintiff’s writing style and on self-confirming ‘AI comparison’ outputs generated using Plaintiff’s own outlines and content.”
The lawsuit is the latest in a growing number of legal challenges from students who argue they were unfairly labelled as plagiarists due to suspected AI use.
In October last year, a Long Island student sued Adelphi College, alleging that his work was wrongly classified as AI-generated without an opportunity for appeal. A year earlier, parents of a Massachusetts high school student filed a similar lawsuit against their son’s school.
Meanwhile, educators have reported increasing difficulty managing the surge of AI-generated assignments, with some saying traditional homework models are becoming ineffective.
Institutions are also reportedly leveraging AI tools to assess admission essays, helping process large volumes of applications more efficiently.
The lawsuit also raises broader concerns about the reliability of AI detection software, which research indicates can produce inaccurate results.
According to the complaint, the instructor in question had previously written publicly, “I fear that grading has made me paranoid and inclined to see AI everywhere.”
In November 2025, he allegedly lodged an academic misconduct charge against Doe, stating he was “immediately suspicious” of what he described as the paper’s “unmistakable” AI-esque style.
READ ALSO:
Cruise ship carrying student tourists docks in Mombasa for six-day visit
In response, Doe submitted “medical and psychological documentation” explaining that symptoms related to obsessive compulsive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder could affect her demeanour and writing style in ways that might be misread as dishonesty.
“Plaintiff’s disabilities affect her ability to tolerate high-stress academic and disciplinary proceedings, particularly those requiring live verbal defence, rapid processing, and adversarial questioning,” the complaint reads.
It further states, “Plaintiff’s clinicians warned that anxiety- and OCD-related writing traits – such as a formal tone, meticulous structure, stylistic consistency, and highly organised presentation — may be misinterpreted as artificial or dishonest behaviour, and that Plaintiff’s limitations necessitate disability-informed handling of any disciplinary proceedings.”
In conclusion, the lawsuit asserts, “Defendants treated disability-related traits and limitations as evidence of guilt and failed to apply disability- informed modifications in the academic integrity process.”
The case underscores the growing tension between academic institutions’ efforts to combat AI misuse and concerns over fairness, disability rights, and due process.
By Joseph Mambili
You can also follow our social media pages on Twitter: Education News KE and Facebook: Education News Newspaper for timely updates.
>>> Click here to stay up-to-date with trending regional stories
>>> Click here to read more informed opinions on the country’s education landscape
