Judge Dismisses Trump Antisemitism Lawsuit Against Harvard

A federal judge in Boston dismissed the Trump administration’s lawsuit accusing Harvard University of tolerating antisemitism on its campus, delivering a significant legal setback to the administration’s broader campaign against American universities. U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns ruled Thursday that the government failed to prove an ongoing violation of federal civil rights law, according to NPR.

The Ruling

The lawsuit, filed by the Justice Department in March 2026, alleged that Harvard failed to protect Jewish students during pro-Palestinian demonstrations that roiled the campus following Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 attacks on Israel. The government sought to recover billions of dollars in federal research grants awarded to Harvard since October 2023 under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination based on race or national origin in federally funded programs.

Judge Stearns, a Clinton appointee, ruled that the cases cited by the government were “too isolated and episodic” to prove a persistent civil rights violation at the Ivy League campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The judge noted that the lawsuit mostly focused on incidents from the 2023-24 academic year, with only a few from March 2025, and found no evidence of noncompliance after the government notified Harvard on June 30, 2025 that it was not in compliance with federal law.

“The court begins (and ends) with Harvard’s first argument,” Stearns wrote in his ruling. “The Government has not sufficiently pled an ongoing violation of Title VI.”

Legal Framework

In his ruling, Stearns emphasized that Congress’s intent in enacting Title VI “was not to penalize a wayward funding recipient but instead to incentivize it to bring itself into compliance with Title VI.” The judge rejected the Justice Department’s argument that requiring proof of ongoing noncompliance would make it “virtually impossible for the United States to win a Title VI suit,” as Inside Higher Ed reported.

Stearns also addressed the scope of his ruling, noting it applies only to cases where there is not enough evidence to demonstrate ongoing noncompliance. “If comfort is needed, the court’s ruling does not have as broad an impact as the Government asserts,” he wrote.

Government Response

Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights at the Department of Justice, said in a statement: “We disagree with the ruling and are assessing next steps.” Harvard did not immediately provide a comment on the decision, according to The Guardian.

Broader Context

The dismissed lawsuit was part of a yearslong battle between the Trump administration and Harvard, which refused a list of demands made by the White House after Trump returned to office. The administration has sought to cut Harvard’s research funding, limit its ability to enroll foreign students and U.S. military members, and has pursued separate legal actions against the university.

This ruling marks the second major legal defeat for the administration in its confrontation with Harvard. In September 2025, a federal judge ordered the administration to reverse more than $2.6 billion in federal funding cuts to Harvard, finding that the White House put unconstitutional conditions on federal funding, using antisemitism as a “smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault” on universities. The administration has appealed that ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Harvard has also faced scrutiny over its response to campus antisemitism. University President Alan M. Garber has said the institution formed a task force to combat antisemitism, hired a new provost and new deans, and reformed its discipline policies. Harvard also adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism into its non-discrimination policies, as Harvard Magazine noted.

Implications for Other Universities

The ruling could have implications for similar Title VI lawsuits the administration has filed against other institutions. The Justice Department has separately sued the University of California twice over allegations of antisemitism at UCLA, and those cases may be affected by this ruling’s interpretation of Title VI.

The administration’s Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism has also taken action against Columbia University, which saw $400 million in federal funding withheld in March 2025 before the institution acquiesced to administration demands.

What’s Next

The Justice Department is assessing whether to appeal the dismissal. If it does, the First Circuit would review the decision. Meanwhile, other legal battles between Harvard and the administration remain pending, including a separate lawsuit over admissions practices and the appeal of the funding case.

The ruling represents a notable interpretation of Title VI enforcement that could shape how the government pursues civil rights claims against universities in the future. As Stearns wrote, the purpose of an enforcement action under the statute is forward-looking: to bring institutions into compliance, not to penalize them for past conduct.