An AI-cheating account claims that students used AI tools extensively and that administrators at Brown University did not respond with sufficient urgency. The piece centers on Roberto Serrano’s assertion that “half his class used AI to cheat” and frames his critique around what he perceives as limited institutional consequences or follow-through. The report aligns with broader integrity debates about generative AI in assessments, but keeps the emphasis on Brown’s response as experienced by a student. It does not quantify institutional enforcement actions, instead focusing on the student’s allegations. For higher-ed leaders, the development reinforces the compliance and governance challenge: institutions face scrutiny on both academic integrity policy enforcement and the transparency of their responses to verified misconduct claims.