CUNY Must Face Antisemitism Lawsuit, Federal Court Rules

CUNY Must Face Antisemitism Lawsuit, Federal Court Rules

In an early and important win, a federal district court has ruled that a Jewish professor’s antisemitism lawsuit against the City University of New York (CUNY) can go forward.

Leah Garrett is the Director of Jewish Studies at Hunter College, part of the CUNY school system. In December 2024, she sued CUNY in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, claiming the school failed to combat antisemitism on campus and violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Garrett’s case is one of many we’ve covered in the ongoing battle against antisemitism at CUNY, a school once known for welcoming working-class Jewish students when other schools excluded them. Until relatively recently, CUNY was a popular choice for Jewish students and staff, and the university regularly recruited from yeshivas.

Those days are over. Dubbed “America’s most anti-Semitic university,” CUNY is now a hotbed of Jew-hatred.

After the Hamas-led October 7th attacks on Israel, antisemitism escalated at CUNY. Garrett’s complaint describes a campus overtaken by loud and disruptive anti-Israel protests:

Protestors thronged the lobby, blocked entrances to elevators and escalators, and forced Plaintiff to navigate through hostile crowds as they chanted slogans that are threatening to Jews. Protesters displayed signs with disturbing and violent imagery, such as Jewish symbols dripping with blood, while demanding the expulsion of Zionists from CUNY Hunter. Using megaphones, the protesters often amplified their hateful rhetoric, which reverberated through classrooms, hallways, and offices, spreading an atmosphere of fear and intimidation that affected Plaintiff’s ability to work.

And yet, despite repeated requests from Garrett and others for the school to intervene, the lawsuit says CUNY leaders sat on their hands.

CUNY asked the court to dismiss Garrett’s lawsuit, claiming its conduct was protected speech under the First Amendment.

The U.S. Department of Justice subsequently filed a Statement of Interest rejecting CUNY’s reliance on the First Amendment to avoid liability under Title VII.

Now, Judge Vernon S. Broderick—an Obama appointee—has reached the same conclusion. His ruling on Friday adopts the federal magistrate’s earlier report and recommendation to deny CUNY’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

“Even once-peaceful protests may deteriorate into actionable harassment,” the court wrote, when “protestors begin targeting individuals with ‘threatening or humiliating conduct.'”

Garrett says she and her colleagues were afraid to show their faces on campus. They even removed their names from their office doors and CUNY’s online directories, according to the lawsuit. On numerous occasions, she felt compelled to cancel class, avoid faculty senate meetings, and host Jewish events remotely. She says she stopped wearing her Star of David jewelry and that she wore a cap pulled low over her face to avoid being recognized.

At an anti-Hillel demonstration earlier this year, Garrett says she and many Jewish students felt forced to leave campus when protesters gathered at Hunter’s main entrance, shouting “Hillel can go to Hell” and “Hillel, what do you say, how many killers did you feed today?” Hillel is a Jewish student organization on campus.

Although then-President Ann Kirschner acknowledged the protests against Hillel had personally targeted Jewish students, the lawsuit says the school nonetheless failed to take any decisive action.

And here, the court drew the line: “While protestors are free to criticize Hillel, or any campus organization for that matter, with strong and even offensive language, antidiscrimination law does not permit an employer to stand idly by when, as here, protestors ‘isolated or targeted individual[s]’ in the protected class.”

“Worse yet,” the court continued, “are the allegations that CUNY assured Garrett that security would be provided at certain events but failed to provide it, leaving Garrett – and her guests – unexpectedly exposed to ‘potentially dangerous’ protests.”

Nor did the court buy CUNY’s argument that its conduct was “rooted in the conflict between Israel and Hamas.” Rather, it concluded that Garrett plausibly alleged she was targeted because she is a Jew.

Garrett’s case is now headed to trial. It’s under DOJ scrutiny. And it’s before a court that has already decided she plausibly alleged CUNY’s conduct crossed the line separating protected political speech from harassment.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.