Andrea Picciotti-Bayer

Opinion contributor

AI-assisted summary Several universities, including Harvard, UCLA and Northwestern, face legal action for alleged failures to address antisemitic incidents on campus.

UCLA agreed to a $6 million settlement for claims related to Jewish students and a professor being blocked from campus areas during pro-Palestinian protests.

Harvard settled two lawsuits and agreed to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism and implement new policies to address bias complaints.

Northwestern faced backlash and a federal investigation for a deal with student protesters that was perceived as sanctioning antisemitism.

These cases highlight the growing legal and financial consequences for universities that fail to protect students from faith-based discrimination.

As a mother of 10, three of whom will be in college this fall, and a committed civil rights advocate, I’ve long defended the rights of all people to live, study and worship free from fear and discrimination. That commitment doesn’t end where campus protests begin.

In the wake of the Hamas massacre in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, antisemitic harassment surged at many elite universities − not just in the form of protest slogans but also in physical exclusion, intimidation and administrative indifference. As Jewish students found themselves targeted because of their identity, too many institutions failed to act.

Now, the legal system is stepping in. Several top-ranked universities − including Harvard, UCLA and my own undergraduate alma mater, Northwestern − have been forced to reckon with their failures through high-profile settlements and federally mandated reforms.

The result is a growing body of precedent: When universities permit faith-based hostility toward students to flourish, they risk violating civil rights law.

UCLA agrees to settle antisemitism complaints

The University of California, Los Angeles, announced July 29 that it will pay $6 million to settle claims brought by Jewish students and a professor who were blocked from accessing parts of campus during pro-Palestinian encampments. University security erected barricades and allowed selective access, effectively creating what students called a “Jew Exclusion Zone.”

Need a break? Play the USA TODAY Daily Crossword Puzzle.

Terms of the settlement include direct compensation to the plaintiffs, funding for Jewish organizations, new protest oversight rules and a 15-year commitment to civil rights monitoring. The Justice Department weighed in, asserting that UCLA had created a discriminatory environment in violation of Title VI and the equal protection clause.

In January, Harvard University settled two civil rights lawsuits brought by Jewish students and advocacy organizations, including the Brandeis Center. The plaintiffs documented a pattern of threats, encampments and institutional silence that left Jewish students vulnerable and alienated.

Harvard’s settlement includes a commitment to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which helps distinguish between criticism of Israeli policies and unlawful harassment based on Jewish identity.

The university also agreed to improve staff training, appoint an antisemitism coordinator and publish annual public reports on bias complaints. Harvard continues to deny wrongdoing, but its policy changes speak volumes.

Northwestern deal with protesters raises objections

My alma mater, Northwestern, made headlines of its own − not for a court settlement but for a controversial deal with student protesters. Without consulting the broader student body or faculty, the administration quietly entered into a memorandum of understanding that provided institutional support to anti-Zionist organizations and permitted protest encampments on the Evanston campus.

Jewish student groups said the deal effectively sanctioned exclusion and antisemitic targeting.

The backlash was fierce. Donors withheld millions of dollars in gifts. The Department of Health and Human Service’s Office of Civil Rights opened a Title VI investigation.

University administrators, to the chagrin of a group of faculty members, are in talks with the Trump administration to settle allegations that it violated antidiscrimination law and to restore its federal grants.

The episode in Evanston should serve as a cautionary tale: Silence and appeasement are not neutral.

At other institutions of learning, the same story has unfolded. Columbia University paid more than $200 million to resolve federal claims after failing to protect Jewish students. Barnard College and New York University both implemented structural reforms, including the hiring of Title VI coordinators and new reporting requirements.

The message is clear: Universities will now be judged by whether they uphold civil rights for all students.

These settlements don’t chill free speech. They reaffirm the principle that no student should face exclusion, threats or intimidation based on religion or ethnicity.

That’s a principle I embrace not just as an advocate, but also as a mother and a committed Catholic. What starts with antisemitism rarely ends there. A university that tolerates harassment of Jewish students will likely fail other students of faith.

Institutions of higher education must create space for debate without sacrificing the dignity and safety of their students. The stakes are no longer just a matter of reputation − they’re legal, financial and moral.

From Harvard Yard to the hills of Westwood to the shores of Lake Michigan, the tide is turning. Universities are being reminded − by courts, donors and parents − that equality under the law is not optional. It is the foundation of a truly robust education and necessary to preserve the freedoms we cherish as a nation.

Andrea Picciotti-Bayer is a former civil rights attorney and director of the Conscience Project.