Cases & Developments

Memorandum Opinion Granting Plaintiff’s Application for Enforcement. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), as part of its investigation into possible discrimination against Jewish employees at the University of Pennsylvania, sued the university seeking to enforce a subpoena that sought, among other things, lists of school groups and organizations “related to the Jewish religion,” including personal contact information for Penn employees in those groups. The court found that while “ineptly worded,” the EEOC’s request had an “understandable purpose.” The court rejected the university’s argument that the subpoena infringed on affected employees’ substantive due process right to informational privacy, determining that home addresses, phone numbers, and participation in campus groups did not rise to the level of “highly personal” non-public facts. The court also found that the university failed to demonstrate how disclosure would create a “serious safety risk,” and provided little evidence as to how enforcement of the subpoena would chill the affected employees’ ability to associate. The court concluded that the EEOC’s charge was valid and ordered the university to comply with the subpoena, while noting the parties agreed upon stipulation that the university need not disclose employees’ specific affiliations with particular Jewish organizations. The university intends to appeal the decision.

In November, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued the University of Pennsylvania to enforce a subpoena in an ongoing workplace harassment investigation which seeks “lists of employees that reveal their Jewish faith or ancestry, associations with Jewish organizations, affiliation with Jewish studies, participation in programming for the Jewish community and/or de-anonymized responses to surveys on antisemitism, alongside their personal home addresses, phone numbers, and emails.” The university’s motion asks the court to deny the EEOC’s request noting that (1) the request does not satisfy the criteria for judicial enforcement and is unreasonably burdensome; (2) the privacy interests of the university’s employees outweigh the EEOC’s need for access; and (3) the request demands information that is not within the university’s possession, custody, or control.

The Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (the Department) announced its finding that George Mason University violated Title VI by illegally using race and other immutable characteristics in university practices and policies, including hiring and promotion. Specifically, the Department received allegations that the University President created an atmosphere of surveillance pertaining to the University’s hiring decisions in relation to DEI objectives and policies that support racial preferencing. The Department issued a proposed Resolution Agreement, and the University has been given ten days to voluntarily resolve the violations. The proposed Resolution Agreement requires (i) the University President personally issue a statement to the campus community that the University will conduct all recruitment, hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions in compliance with Title VI, and disseminate information to the campus community explaining how to submit a discrimination complaint; (ii) include a personal apology from the University President for promoting unlawful discriminatory practices in hiring, promotion, and tenure processes; (iii) post the statement prominently on the University website and remove from its website any contrary statements; (iv) review its policies and revise any documents currently used in the University recruitment, hiring, and promotion process to ensure compliance with Title VI, and remove any provisions that require or encourage the use of race to favor or disfavor any candidate; (v) conduct an annual training of all individuals involved in and responsible for recruitment, hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions to impart that the University will not give preferences based on race, color, or national origin in those processes; and (vi) maintain all records necessary to demonstrate compliance with the Agreement, making them available to the government upon request, and assign an individual to coordinate the University’s implementation of the Agreement with OCR.  

The Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (the Department) announced an investigation of Haverford College for alleged Title VI violations. The Department initiated the investigation based on reports that the College failed to respond to multiple incidents of discrimination and harassment against Jewish and Israeli students. Specifically, allegations were made that senior leadership at the College told Jewish students that they should be “brave” in the face of anti-Semitic harassment and not expect to be “safe.” The investigation follows the Congressional hearing focused on antisemitism where campus leaders from the College among other institutions were called to testify.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) found George Washington University in violation of Title VI following an investigation into the University’s response to incidents of antisemitic discrimination and harassment of Jewish and Israeli students. Specifically, the DOJ found deliberate indifference to the complaints the University received, despite actual notice of the misconduct. In the notice letter, the DOJ cited examples of antisemitic and disruptive protests, and cited the establishment of an encampment, constituting a hostile environment that was objectively offensive, severe, and pervasive, such that Jewish students were afraid to attend class in light of the alleged harassment, abuse, intimidation, and assault. The University has been offered an opportunity to enter into a voluntary resolution agreement to ensure immediate remediation and was given the deadline of August 22, 2025.