On November 18, 2025 (Wednesday), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) officially filed a lawsuit against the University of Pennsylvania at the Philadelphia Federal District Court, accusing the Ivy League institution of failing to comply with federal subpoenas and systematically concealing core evidence related to campus anti-Semitic investigations. These pieces of evidence include records of complaints from Jewish staff, lists of members of the campus Jewish groups, and lists of staff involved in Jewish research projects.
The case, numbered 2:25-cv-06502, is referred to as the first time a federal agency has taken legal action against a top university in the United States since the anti-Semitic controversy sparked by the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, marking the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance stance on discrimination on campus.
The lawsuit stems back to the terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7, 2023. Subsequently, there were widespread anti-Semitic demonstrations and harassment incidents at American universities, with reports of Jewish staff at Penn encountering Nazi symbols graffiti, anti-Semitic slogans, and open hostility on campus. The university was accused of failing to intervene in a timely manner, leading to a continuously hostile work environment. In December 2023, EEOC Commissioner Andrea R. Lucas filed charges, initiating an investigation, alleging that Penn violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by engaging in employment discrimination based on religion, nationality, and race.
The accusations state that Penn has long ignored complaints from Jewish employees and failed to take effective remedial measures, allowing the harassment to escalate. With around 20,000 employees and 12 schools including the Wharton School, Penn’s largest employer in Philadelphia, this case directly impacts its core management and has sparked strong backlash from Congress and donors.
In July 2025, EEOC issued comprehensive subpoenas, requesting Penn to submit: 1) complete lists of members of all Jewish-related campus groups; 2) lists of staff involved in Jewish research projects and their contact information; and 3) the identities of harassment victims, witnesses, and all complaint records. EEOC emphasized that this information is crucial evidence in determining the scope of harm and assessing whether the university’s response was negligent.
Although Penn submitted over 100 documents and nearly 900 pages of materials, including some policies and incident reports, they refused to provide core lists and detailed complaint records, disclosing only 3 formal complaints, far below EEOC’s expectations. The university proposed an alternative plan for anonymously notifying relevant individuals to voluntarily contact EEOC, a proposal that was rejected by the commission.
Penn argued that disclosing the lists would severely violate privacy and expose the Jewish community to retaliation risks, especially amid the current backdrop of frequent anti-Semitic incidents, which they claim amounts to “secondary harm.” The university emphasized that they have implemented corrective measures, including enhancing security, establishing a reporting hotline, and conducting anti-Semitism training for all employees, since former President Liz Magill resigned amid controversy in November 2023.
However, EEOC believes that Penn’s cooperation is “largely illusory,” as they refused to provide substantive victim and witness information, hindering the investigation. EEOC lawyers stated in the complaint that the subpoena requested is highly relevant and falls within federal authorization. EEOC Chair Lucas publicly stated, “If employers refuse to identify potential victim employees, it will seriously undermine our enforcement capabilities, and we will resort to the courts when necessary.”
On November 18, 2025, the case was filed in the Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania, with EEOC requesting the court to enforce the subpoena and impose daily fines. The timeline of key events: Penn applied to withdraw the subpoena on July 30, citing academic freedom violations; EEOC partially amended the subpoena on September 2 and set a 21-day compliance deadline; after the deadline expired, they directly filed the lawsuit.
This is not the first time Penn has clashed with EEOC in court. The Supreme Court precedent in the 1990 case of “Penn v. EEOC” ruled that EEOC subpoenas constitute only an “incidental burden” and do not require special evidence for enforcement, providing a strong precedent for this lawsuit. While Penn may argue for “qualified privilege” due to the current sensitivity around anti-Semitism, their chances of success are low.
Analysts estimate that if Penn loses the case, they will be forced to disclose the lists, potentially facing daily fines of $10,000, with the total amount exceeding a million dollars. Furthermore, if systematic negligence is confirmed, they may be required to compensate victims, pay legal fees, undergo five years of compliance monitoring, costing tens of millions, combined with over $100 million in donations lost since 2023, the reputational damage would be severe.
Even if Penn wins the case, it may not halt EEOC’s investigations into other universities. The case is expected to conclude in the first half of 2026, potentially being appealed to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, with its ruling setting boundaries for future EEOC subpoena enforcement.
Since October 2023, incidents of anti-Semitism at American universities have surged, leading federal agencies to launch the largest-scale reviews based on Title VI (students) and Title VII (employees). As of November 2025, over 150 universities have been investigated, including Harvard, Columbia, NYU, the University of California system, and more.