62 No. 78 JUSTICE Why do we think this opinion is important? There are a growing number of frivolous cases in which those who call attention to Jew-hatred are being sued or subjected to internal university disciplinary proceedings. As of May 2026, we are handling several similar matters where the goal of the plaintiffs is to intimidate and silence criticism of their hate speech. This ruling is a victory for every student who has ever feared speaking out against antisemitism on campus. A young woman raised her voice about hateful content posted by a university administrator − and was sued for it. In short, the Court made clear that such retaliation has no place in our legal system. Deploying Alternative Legal Advocacy Strategies We recognize that sometimes the most effective legal strategy is to persuade a federal or state enforcement agency to open an investigation. Recently, for example, at our urging and based on the evidence we submitted, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights (HHS OCR) opened a federal civil rights investigation into the American Psychological Association (APA) concerning antisemitic discrimination within the nation’s largest professional organization for psychologists.37 The investigation comes amid heightened concerns about antisemitism in the mental health profession, which we have also made public through op-ed articles and congressional testimony, which brought to light reports that Jewish and Israeli psychologists have faced exclusion, hostility, and discrimination in professional and clinical settings. In our submission, we advocated that HHS review the APA’s conduct as a recipient of federal funding, citing evidence that the organization promoted discriminatory and antisemitic practices, including “Decolonial Therapy,” a treatment model increasingly used to frame Zionism as a mental illness and encourage patients to reject it; antiIsrael and antisemitic messaging disseminated through official channels; antisemitic continuing education and conference programming; and the marginalization of Jewish and Israeli psychologists. Our complaints also allege that the APA tolerated harassment of Jewish members, questioned the legitimacy of recognizing Jews as an ethnic group, and ignored recommendations from its own antisemitism task force. The Brandeis Center’s submissions documented reports from Jewish and Israeli psychologists who described being ostracized, marginalized, and subjected to hostility within APA-affiliated spaces. They also cited continuing education courses, conference presentations, organizational statements, listserv communications, and leadership actions that allegedly promoted antisemitic narratives or excluded Jewish viewpoints. To cite another example, we recently filed the first of its kind complaint under Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act (the Fair Housing Act), which was enacted by Congress in 1968 “to provide…for fair housing throughout the United States” by prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion and national origin. The FHA prohibits housing providers from making housing unavailable based on religion and other protected identities and prohibits discrimination “in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith” because of religion.38 In our submission to the Office for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity within the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, we document how Williams College has discriminated against an Orthodox Jewish freshman by refusing to furnish him with a key to open the door to his dormitory, as a result of which he has been unable to freely access his dormitory during the Jewish Shabbat. Because he cannot use the electronic key device provided by the College to open the door of his dormitory building during the Shabbat, Mr. Unger has been effectively locked out of his residential building on numerous occasions, forced to wait outside, at times in freezing Northeast winter weather for over an hour, in the hope that another student who lives in the building will let him inside. We also document that Williams has discriminated in its provision of housing services to our client by limiting and imposing different conditions in his residential dining services in response to his request for kosher food. 37. Office for Civil Rights Complaint Against American Psychological Ass'n at 4, U.S. Dep't of Educ. OCR Transaction No. 25-634830 (June 11, 2026). 38. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=