Some of this danger can be mitigated by switching assessment exclusively over to in-person, proctored, closed book exams. However, this does not work for many courses in the humanities that are intended to teach critical academic writing. A 3 hour closed book exam is totally inadequate for assessing the student's ability to conduct research and write a long, critical essay. Similar issues exist for many other fields, particularly as you go deeper into specialization in a field where an examination covering basic facts and skills cannot suffice.
I.e. the point of this thread isn't around the specific case of the anomalous student, rather the issue raised around AI enforcement in schools and what it means for the typical student. And yes, average IT students will still get involved with situations around AI and their school - they just aren't going to make the news with a court case.
That applies to universities as much as to your employer and to me personally.
This seems a little uncharitable to me considering society has no idea what the rules around AI should be and is therefore making them on the fly too. Why do we expected school administrators to be so far in front of everyone else on these issues?