The increasing integration of AI-powered tools in academic settings presents both opportunities and ethical challenges for students in higher education. This study examines how students from two distinct cultural and academic contexts—Hassan I University in Morocco and Kennesaw State University in the USA—perceive and rationalize the use of AI-powered tools in academic tasks. Employing Sykes and Matza’s neutralization theory, the research explores how students justify potentially unethical behavior through techniques such as denial of responsibility, appeal to higher loyalties, and condemnation of condemners. Data were collected through quantitative surveys and thematic analysis of open-ended responses. They revealed notable cultural and contextual differences in how students rationalize AI use. While KSU students used AI as integral academic assistance tools and justified their use through social comparison, their Moroccan counterparts—Hassan I University students—emphasized institutional ambiguity, attributing AI use to external academic pressures. The findings draw attention to the need for context-specific academic integrity guidelines that address both the ethical implications of AI use and the rationalization strategies that students utilize to mitigate feelings of guilt or perceived wrongdoing. Recommendations include the integration of AI ethics training, the establishment of clear institutional guidelines, and further research into how students’ rationalizations of AI use evolve over time.