Harvard Asks Judge to Toss DOJ Antisemitism Suit, Calling Claims Outdated

Harvard asked a federal judge Monday to dismiss the Department of Justice’s lawsuit accusing the University of failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students, arguing that the Trump administration’s claims are outdated and legally deficient.

In a 49-page motion filed in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, Harvard’s lawyers argued that the government failed to plausibly allege a continuing violation of Title VI, which bars discrimination in programs that receive federal funding. They also contended that the Justice Department cannot use the lawsuit to claw back nearly $1 billion in already spent federal grant money.

The motion is Harvard’s most forceful response to the DOJ’s March lawsuit, which alleged that the University was “deliberately indifferent” to antisemitic and anti-Israeli harassment after Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel.

The government has asked the court to impose sweeping remedies, including the appointment of an outside monitor, a bar on future federal funding, and restitution of federal grants issued during the period of alleged noncompliance.

Harvard’s lawyers rejected that account on Monday, writing that the complaint relies on “a snapshot in time that does not exist today” and ignores a long list of steps the University says it has taken to combat antisemitism.

“It is remarkable that the Complaint omits any reference to these actions,” Harvard’s lawyers wrote.

Much of the DOJ’s complaint draws on a report produced by Harvard’s task force on antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias, which documented deep concern among Jewish and Israeli students. But Harvard’s lawyers argued that the report also catalogued extensive reforms — including new protest rules, antisemitism training, a streamlined disciplinary process, and expanded complaint procedures.

The filing questioned how the DOJ could rely heavily on the task force report in its complaint and yet maintain that Harvard was “deliberately indifferent” to antisemitism on campus — what it called an “ostrich-like attempt to ignore” the University’s response.

The filing sets up a major test for U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns, who has twice before considered claims that Harvard mishandled antisemitism on campus. Stearns previously allowed deliberate indifference claims against Harvard to proceed in Title VI lawsuits brought by Harvard Divinity School graduate Alexander “Shabbos” Kestenbaum and the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law. He has, however, dismissed related claims of direct discrimination.

But Harvard argued Monday that the government’s case is fundamentally different from those earlier suits because it seeks broad federal enforcement based on past incidents, rather than relief tied to an alleged ongoing violation.

Harvard also cited its January 2025 decision to incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism into its nondiscrimination policies — a move made as part of settlements with Kestenbaum and the Brandeis Center.

The DOJ’s lawsuit, Harvard argued, ignores those developments and instead repackages the same claims the Trump administration used last year to justify freezing billions of dollars in federal research funding.

That earlier funding freeze was struck down in September by U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs, who found that the administration had violated Harvard’s constitutional rights and failed to comply with Title VI procedures.

Harvard leaned heavily on that ruling Monday, arguing that the government is attempting to relitigate a factual premise Burroughs already rejected: that Harvard failed to meaningfully respond to antisemitism after Oct. 7.

The complaint, Harvard wrote, “retreads allegations already tested and rejected in court.”

Stearns has already rejected Harvard’s effort to transfer the DOJ case to Burroughs, ruling last month that the lawsuit more closely resembles the earlier private antisemitism cases than the funding dispute.

—Staff writer Hugo C. Chiasson can be reached at [email protected] or on Signal at hcc.35. Follow him on X @HugoChiassonn.

—Staff writer Elise A. Spenner can be reached at [email protected] or on Signal at elisespenner.82. Follow her on X @EliseSpenner.