Amicus Brief: StandWithUs v. MIT

After the attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, protests happened at universities around the country. At MIT, students and faculty protesters called for violence against Jews. Protesters disrupted classes and impeded access to public spaces, and they coalesced around Jewish community and religious locations as they targeted students and faculty because of their Jewish identities. These actions, among others, violated MIT’s time, place, and manner rules for protests, and made campus life intolerable for Jews. Because MIT failed to take adequate steps to address these realities, its campus devolved into a severely antisemitic environment.

StandWithUS challenged MIT's actions (or lack thereof) as a violation of its obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. MIT is a private university, but it is still required to at least not be "deliberately indifferent" to a "hostile environment." The First Circuit ruled that MIT's actions were not deliberately indifferent to a hostile environment because the protesters were anti-Zionistic rather than antisemitic, and the protesters' speech was political speech protected by the First Amendment. 

Now on petition for Supreme Court review, the Manhattan Institute has filed a brief in support. We argue that the lower court made errors in how it interpreted the facts at the pleading stage. The First Circuit illegitimately explained away each fact rather than looking holistically at the totality of facts that created an antisemitic environment. That approach to the pleadings also highlights a circuit split about the legal standard to apply to cases like this. The Supreme Court should take the case to clarify how to apply Title VI. 

Ilya Shapiro is a senior fellow and director of Constitutional Studies at the Manhattan Institute. Follow him on Twitter here.

Trevor Burrus is a legal policy fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

Tal Fortgang is a legal policy fellow at the Manhattan Institute.