Harvard University on Aug. 6 lost its bid to throw out a lawsuit that accuses university officials of ignoring discrimination against Jewish students and breaching university policies with their handling of pro-Palestinian protests.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars universities that receive federal funds, including Harvard, from intentionally discriminating against students on the ground of national origin. Violations of the law occur when a university exhibits deliberate indifference, or “affirmatively choosing to do the wrong thing, or doing nothing, despite knowing what the law requires,” according to court precedent.
Harvard argued that it did respond to the campus protests and acts of anti-Semitism. Even if the response was less than ideal, it was not clearly unreasonable, lawyers for the university told the court.
Stearns disagreed, calling Harvard’s response “at best, indecisive, vacillating, and at times internally contradictory.”
As an example, he pointed to how Harvard Dean of Students Stephen Ball informed all students that a lounge on campus was only for “personal or small group study and conversation.” After Ball’s email, though, demonstrators hosted a pro-Palestinian vigil in the lounge. Administrators not only did not seek to respond, but the dean himself attended the vigil.
“To conclude that the [complaint] has not plausibly alleged deliberate indifference would reward Harvard for virtuous public declarations that for the most part, according to the allegations of the [lawsuit], proved hollow when it came to taking disciplinary measures against offending students and faculty,” Stearns wrote.
The lawsuit was originally filed by Alexander Kestenbaum, a Jewish student, and Students Against Antisemitism Inc. in January, shortly after Harvard President Claudine Gay stepped down over criticism of her handling of the pro-Palestinian protests and unearthed plagiarism in her scholarly work.
Brown University and New York University faced similar lawsuits but settled them in July. Brown University agreed to conduct annual nondiscrimination training for employees and students while New York University said it would create a new position of Title VI coordinator.
Harvard could choose to settle its case since its motion to dismiss was largely rejected. Stearns said plaintiffs’ claims of contract breach could also move forward, while the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient evidence to advance a claim that Harvard enforced its policies inconsistently.
He directed Harvard to file a response to the lawsuit by Aug. 27 and set other deadlines as the case heads toward trial absent a settlement.
