Skip to Content Subscribe Our Offers My Account Manage My Subscriptions FAQ Newsletters Canada Canadian True Crime Canadian Politics Health World Israel & Middle East Financial Post NP Comment Longreads Puzzmo Diversions Comics NP News Quiz New York Times Crossword Horoscopes Life Eating & Drinking Style Sponsored Play for Ontario Travel Travel Canada Travel USA Travel International Cruises Travel Essentials Culture Books Celebrity Movies Music Theatre Television Business Essentials Advice Lives Told Tails Told Shopping Buy Canadian Home Living Outdoor Living Kitchen & Dining Tech Style & Beauty Personal Care Entertainment & Hobbies Gift Guide Travel Guide Amazon Prime Day Deals Savings National Post Store More Sports Hockey Baseball Basketball Football Soccer Golf Tennis Driving Vehicle Research Reviews News Gear Guide Obituaries Place an Obituary Place an In Memoriam Classifieds Place an Ad Celebrations Working Business Ads Archives Healthing Epaper Manage Print Subscription Profile Settings My Subscriptions Saved Articles My Offers Newsletters Customer Service FAQ Newsletters Canada World Financial Post NP Comment Longreads Puzzmo Diversions Life Shopping Epaper Manage Print Subscription HomeNewsWorldHarvard University wins dismissal of federal lawsuit over campus antisemitismThe judge ruled that the Justice Department didn’t back up its claims that Harvard violated a civil rights law by failing to protect Jewish students after the October 2023 attack by Hamas on IsraelAuthor of the article: You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.Anti-Israel protesters hold a rally at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on Oct. 14, 2023. Photo by JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty ImagesHarvard University won dismissal of a federal lawsuit claiming that it had “turned a blind eye to antisemitism and discrimination against Jews and Israelis,” marking another setback in the Trump administration’s campaign against the school.Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.Unlimited online access to National Post.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.Support local journalism.Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.Unlimited online access to National Post.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.Support local journalism.Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one account.Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.Enjoy additional articles per month.Get email updates from your favourite authors.Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one accountShare your thoughts and join the conversation in the commentsEnjoy additional articles per monthGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountorU.S. District Judge Richard Stearns in Boston ruled that the Justice Department didn’t sustain its claims that Harvard violated a civil rights law by failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students after the October 2023 attack by Hamas on Israel.The U.S. focused “almost entirely” on the 2023-24 school year and cited only three incidents after that to support its claims that Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin, Stearns ruled Thursday.Get a dash of perspective along with the trending news of the day in a very readable format.By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.The next issue of NP Posted will soon be in your inbox.We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again“Without diminishing any concern arising from these occurrences, the court finds them, singly and collectively, to be too isolated and episodic to support a plausible inference that any institutionalized noncompliance with Title VI persists at Harvard to this day,” Stearns wrote in a four-page opinion.Harvard has been a top target of the Trump administration’s efforts to remake higher education. What began as criticism of the university’s handling of alleged antisemitism on campus following the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza later broadened into a push to remake and gain oversight of Harvard’s admissions, hiring and governance.Federal agencies have also started several civil rights and other investigations into Harvard as part of the pressure campaign. While other schools including Columbia University and Brown University reached settlements with the administration over similar claims, Harvard hasn’t made such an agreement and has won court cases over the White House’s attempts to cut off federal research funding to the university and halt international student enrollment. The Trump administration is appealing the ruling over the funding.“We disagree with the ruling and are assessing next steps,” Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights at the Justice Department, said in a statement. “The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division is actively investigating antisemitism nationwide. The Civil Rights Division has an extensive and active portfolio of antisemitism enforcement, including indictments, prosecutions, settlements, and investigations across the country.”Spokespeople for Harvard didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.In his opinion, Stearns said the government misconstrued the purpose of an enforcement action under Title VI.“Congress’s intent was not to penalize a wayward funding recipient but instead to incentivize it to bring itself into compliance with Title VI,” the judge wrote. “Even in the Government’s fevered forewarning of potential havoc, it concedes that its own hypothetical result is a positive, if roughly achieved, outcome.”The case is United States of America v. Harvard, 26-11352, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston).Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here. Join the Conversation This website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.