Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
A federal judge on Thursday dismissed the Trump administration’s lawsuit accusing Harvard University of allowing antisemitism and discrimination against Jewish and Israeli students to continue on campus, delivering another major setback to the administration’s campaign against the Ivy League institution.
U.S. District Judge Richard Stearns, a Clinton appointee, ruled that the Justice Department failed to establish an ongoing violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin in federally funded programs.
The Justice Department filed the lawsuit in March, accusing Harvard of failing to adequately respond to antisemitic incidents following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza.
Stearns found that the administration’s case relied largely on incidents from the 2023-24 academic year.
Only three alleged incidents cited by the government occurred after that period, the judge wrote. Those incidents were too “isolated and episodic” to demonstrate that Harvard was continuing to violate Title VI, according to the ruling.
Judge says government failed to show ongoing violations
The ruling turns on whether the conduct cited by the Trump administration demonstrated a continuing pattern of discrimination rather than a series of incidents that had already occurred.
Stearns concluded that the government did not meet that burden.
The administration’s lawsuit alleged that Jewish and Israeli students had been “harassed, physically assaulted, stalked, and spat upon” in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attack.
The government argued that Harvard had failed to adequately address those incidents and had not done enough to protect Jewish students from antisemitism.
But the judge determined that the evidence presented did not establish an ongoing Title VI violation sufficient to support the federal government’s claims.
The decision represents a significant legal setback for the administration, which has spent months using federal funding and civil rights enforcement to pressure Harvard.
DOJ weighs an appeal
The Justice Department indicated that it has not ruled out challenging the decision.
“We disagree with the ruling and are assessing next steps,” Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said in a statement.
The White House referred questions about the ruling to the Justice Department.
An appeal could extend the legal battle between Harvard and the Trump administration, which has already involved federal funding, research grants and allegations of discrimination.
Harvard has repeatedly fought Trump administration
Thursday’s ruling is the latest development in a broader confrontation between the Trump administration and Harvard.
The administration previously sought to freeze more than $2 billion in federal research funding awarded to the university. A federal judge ruled in September 2025 that the funding freeze was illegal, handing Harvard another major victory.
The administration nevertheless continued pursuing actions against the university.
The latest lawsuit was part of the government’s broader effort to hold Harvard accountable for what officials characterized as failures to protect Jewish and Israeli students.
Harvard has rejected the government’s characterization of its response.
“Harvard cares deeply about members of our Jewish and Israeli community and remains committed to ensuring they are embraced, respected, and can thrive on our campus,” the university said in a March statement responding to the lawsuit.
The university has also argued that it has taken steps to address antisemitism and protect students while maintaining its academic and institutional independence.
What the ruling means
The decision does not establish that antisemitism did not occur at Harvard or that individual allegations made by the government were unfounded.
Instead, the ruling addresses whether the federal government demonstrated an ongoing violation of federal civil rights law that would support its lawsuit against the university.
That distinction could become important if the Justice Department appeals.
For now, the ruling limits the administration’s latest legal effort against Harvard and adds to a series of court defeats involving its attempts to pressure the university.
The next major question is whether the Justice Department appeals Stearns’ decision or pursues another avenue to challenge Harvard over its handling of antisemitism.
