DOJ Sues UCLA for Allegedly Allowing Antisemitic Hostile Workplace

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a civil rights lawsuit Tuesday against the University of California, alleging that its Los Angeles campus allowed antisemitic harassment to create a hostile workplace for Jewish and Israeli faculty and staff.

The lawsuit, filed by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in federal court in California, accuses the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) of violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on religion and national origin. The government argues that UCLA failed to prevent or correct repeated antisemitic conduct after October 7.

According to the complaint, antisemitic acts “pervaded” the campus in the months following the attack. Jewish professors were allegedly assaulted. Swastikas were graffitied on university buildings. Jews were barred from portions of the main quad near Royce Hall during campus unrest. Faculty members reported their classrooms being disrupted and their offices targeted with disturbing images.

The lawsuit further claims that Jewish and Israeli employees were physically threatened and subjected to “ostracism” by colleagues and students, while university officials failed to intervene. Some faculty members were forced to take leave, work remotely, or resign in order to avoid what the complaint describes as a hostile work environment.

“The general atmosphere of antisemitism was, and remains, so severe and pervasive that UCLA’s own official Task Force on Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias concluded that the University’s failures to protect Jewish staff and faculty constituted a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII… this suit seeks to right these wrongs,” the court filing states.

Attorney General Pamela Bondi said the investigation found that UCLA administrators allowed the situation to escalate.

“Based on our investigation, UCLA administrators allegedly allowed virulent anti-Semitism to flourish on campus, harming students and staff alike,” Bondi said.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon added, “The litany of vile acts of antisemitism that allegedly took place, and continue to take place, at UCLA are, if found to be true, a mark of shame against the University of California.”

First Assistant United States Attorney Bill Essayli said, “UCLA failed to live up to its systemwide commitment to diversity and equal opportunity when it stood by as Jewish employees were subjected to harassment.”

UCLA has denied tolerating antisemitism and pointed to reforms implemented over the past year. Mary Osako, UCLA’s vice chancellor for strategic communications, said, “Antisemitism is abhorrent and has no place at UCLA or anywhere.”

Osako said the university has reorganized its civil rights office, hired a senior official to oversee discrimination complaints, tightened its rules around campus protests, and launched an Initiative to Combat Antisemitism under Chancellor Julio Frenk’s leadership. “These ongoing and long-standing institutional efforts, including clear expectations and a commitment to enforcement, are working,” she said.

The lawsuit marks a significant escalation in the federal government’s response to antisemitism on American campuses following the October 7 attacks and the war that followed in Gaza. Until now, much of the scrutiny focused on investigations, warning letters, and funding disputes. By filing a formal civil rights lawsuit, the Justice Department is moving into enforcement, accusing a major public university of violating federal anti-discrimination law.

The Justice Department is asking the court to require UCLA to change how it handles discrimination complaints and to award financial compensation to Jewish and Israeli employees who were harmed. If successful, the case could require UCLA to make structural changes to how it handles discrimination complaints and campus unrest involving Jewish and Israeli faculty and staff, placing the issue squarely within federal civil rights law rather than internal campus policy.