Professors and students testified in federal court Thursday that the state’s anti-DEI law is chilling free speech and hurting student morale.

Students and faculty are suing the University of Alabama and Gov. Kay Ivey for a preliminary injunction to SB 129, the law that prohibits state-funded institutions from promoting or participating in diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

In an evidentiary hearing UA junior Ja’koby Biggs, president of the student chapter of the NAACP was among those who testified.

The Black Student Union and Safe Zone Resource Center were closed due to the law. Biggs said that when Black UA students received anonymous racist text messages demanding they go to their designated plantation, they had nowhere to go to “digest what was happening in their lives.”

UAB senior Gabriel Luna testified that the law “made me feel unseen.”

“It made me feel unheard,” Luna said.

“I’ve seen my professors feel a little like they’re walking on eggshells, because the bill is so vague,” said plaintiff Sydney Testman, a UAB senior, at a press conference.

“They don’t know if they’re breaking the law or and that truly is affecting my academic freedom and the discourse we have in class,” Testman said. “That in turn is affecting the way I view the world, the way I’m able to go into the world with my education and my degree.”

Jay Ezelle, attorney for UA, challenged the plaintiffs, including UA political science professor Richard Fording, on whether the law is actually hurting them and if the law is truly vague.

Ezell asked if Fording used the legal guidance provided at the university website for teaching under the new law.

“I’ve been teaching divisive concepts my whole career, Fording said. “I just didn’t see much value there.”

The student plaintiffs claim funding was cancelled for any organization where the “names could be perceived as divisive,” Testman said. However, several of the organizations the student plaintiffs participated in chose not to apply for other funding.

“Why not apply and get a no,” presiding Judge David Proctor asked. He questioned why the students assumed they would not receive the funding.

The students said the deadline had passed, they didn’t know about additional private funding or chose to seek assistance elsewhere.

The defendants begin presenting their case on July 2.