Aditya Prakash and Urmi Bhattacheryya, both recent graduates of the University of Colorado, Boulder have scored a major win. They settled for $200,000 after claiming they had been discriminated against and retaliated against based on their dietary choices. Their nightmare started in September of 2023. It did start a larger and necessary conversation about what many are calling “food racism” in Western nations.
For Prakash, a PhD student in the Anthropology Department, that led to an uncomfortable situation. He was reheating a plateful of his favorite palak paneer in the communal kitchen’s microwave when the clash occurred. One British staffer recounted that the food “smelled really pungent.” They told him about an informal rule prohibiting the heating of pungent food. Prakash challenged the need for such a policy and found out that sandwiches were ok, but curry was not.
The incident was the first spark of an increasingly violent round of escalation. Prakash and Bhattacheryya claim that in the aftermath of this exchange, they were subjected to a concerted campaign of retaliation from the university. These actions meant losing access to crucial research funding, loss of teaching positions, and in some cases, loss of their own PhD advisers.
In May 2025, Prakash and Bhattacheryya decided to file a civil rights lawsuit against their school. They argued that the university’s conduct was discriminatory and a showing of a “pattern of increasing retaliation.” The case became a flashpoint for large-scale protests, receiving unprecedented media coverage across India. It sparked a wider conversation on social media about the prejudice Indians experience when their food habits are mocked overseas.
Prakash was honest about the emotional impact of their ordeal. He stated, “No matter how good you are at what you do, the system is constantly telling you that because of your skin colour or your nationality, you can be sent back any time. The precarity is acute and our experience at the university is a good example of this.”
Further emphasizing their plight, he added, “Acts like isolating me from my European classmates or stopping me from using a shared microwave because of how my food smells are how white people control your Indianness and shrink the spaces you can exist in.” As Prakash noted, the curry stereotype has been weaponized in a manner that does emotional harm to targeted, marginalized communities. This abuse makes it a racist slur that perpetuates hurtful stereotypes.
The incident resonated beyond the Indian community. Millions of Africans, Latin Americans and other Asians joined them on social media to tell their own personal stories. They tearfully, candidly shared stories of being food shamed.
The case really exploded when infamous far-right activist Laura Loomer decried the settlement across social media. Amy Cooper via YouTube Yeah, I mean, she implied that the White House would smell like curry if Kamala Harris became president. Although Loomer denied any racist intent with her statements, it is clear that like Looney, Loomer’s comments fueled the fire on cultural discrimination.
In September 2025, the University of Colorado reached settlements with Prakash and Bhattacheryya. Despite this overwhelming scientific consensus, defendants continue to deny any liability in the case. A university statement affirmed their commitment to addressing discrimination: “Individuals who are determined to be responsible for violating university policies preventing discrimination and harassment are held accountable.”
Prakash and Bhattacheryya further clarified that their ultimate focus wasn’t just monetary restitution but recognition of their lived experiences. For them, they wanted acknowledgement of their trauma and pain around being marginalized because of how they eat.
“It was about making a point – that there are consequences to discriminating against Indians for their ‘Indianness’,” Prakash asserted.