Center for Jewish Legal Studies files amicus brief in support of case against MIT

A case against the Massachusetts Institute of Technology that considers whether anti-Zionism can be discriminatory is getting support from a legal center with roots in Pittsburgh.

Last week, the Center for Jewish Legal Studies filed an amicus brief in support of Jewish students — backed by StandWithUs Center for Legal Justice — to have an appeal heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The center was co-founded earlier this year by Rona Kaufman and Andrea J. Martin. Kaufman lives in Pittsburgh and is an associate professor at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University, where she teaches constitutional law, employment discrimination, family law and gender and the law. Martin teaches law at Penn State Dickinson Law School.

Get The Jewish Chronicle Weekly Edition by email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up

Two Jewish students and StandWithUs, a non-partisan organization that fights antisemitism and educates about Israel, filed their case against MIT in 2025, alleging that, during the 2023-2024 academic year, the university was home to pro-Palestinian activities that left some Jewish students feeling unsafe or unwelcome on campus. The alleged incidents included Jewish students being blocked from campus areas and targeted with hostile remarks.

MIT responded by revising protest policies, suspending some student groups and eventually clearing an anti-Israel encampment; however, it did not discipline all protestors or end the demonstrations immediately, according to case filings.

The StandWithUs Center For Legal Justice and the MIT students sued the university, accusing it of “deliberate indifference” to antisemitic harassment, and claiming that the university selectively enforced rules, failed to protect Jewish students and allowed pro-Palestinian demonstrations that included calls for intifada and chants like “from the river to sea,” which created a hostile educational environment.

A Massachusetts district court dismissed the suit, finding that the plaintiffs did not allege actional harassment or deliberate indifference.

On appeal, the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico and Rhode Island, affirmed the dismissal.

Kaufman said the district court essentially held that “even if everything the plaintiffs say in their case is true, it doesn’t prove that MIT acted deliberately indifferent, which is the standard. Therefore, there’s no liability for MIT.”

The First Circuit, she said, should have simply affirmed the lower court’s decision; instead “they issued a 54-page opinion and about 20 pages of it were dedicated to telling the world that anti-Zionism is not discriminatory against Jews.”

Kaufman called the opinion “outrageous” because, if it is allowed to stand, any time a similar case comes up, defendants can claim that “anti-Zionism doesn’t discriminate against Jews.”

The appellate court was wrong in ruling that anti-Zionism is not discriminatory, Kaufman said, because that should be a matter of fact for a jury to determine.

The court reached other conclusions that effectively changed the elements needed for plaintiffs to prove a hostile environment, she added.

“They said all this nonsense about how anti-Zionism could never be a source of a hostile environment because it’s protected speech and doesn’t discriminate against Jews,” Kaufman said. “Those are also false. If you hear the phrase, ‘There’s only one solution, intifada revolution’ — a perfect combination of Hitler’s final solution and Islamist intifada — that’s the same to me as if someone said the ‘N’ word to a Black person or called me a whore. In fact, intifada revolution sounds a whole lot scarier to me than if someone calls me a whore.”

Kaufman said that while MIT will likely prevail in the suit, that isn’t the point. Rather, she hopes the Supreme Court will remand the case back to the First Circuit, telling it to write a decision consistent with the law.
In that case, she explained, the only question will be whether MIT was deliberately indifferent and created a hostile environment.

“The students will still lose their case. The case will be over, but the record will not be a mess,” she said.

Julie Paris, StandWithUs’ Mid-Atlantic regional director, said the organization is “incredibly proud to partner with the Center for Jewish Legal Studies.”

“We are deeply appreciative of the center’s critical legal efforts to combat antisemitism and protect Jewish students on campus, including its recent amicus brief supporting the Supreme Court petition in StandWithUs Center for Legal Justice v. MIT,” she said. “This case reflects our shared commitment to ensuring Jewish students can learn free from discrimination and harassment.”

While awaiting word on whether the Supreme Court will hear the appeal, Kaufman and the Center for Jewish Legal Studies have their hands full.

Kaufman and co-founder Martin are busy gathering scholars to join the center. They currently have 30, 12 of whom will soon attend a retreat in Washington D.C.

“We’re refining our research agenda, we’re refining our core principles, coming to agreement about exactly what the field is,” she said. “We’re publishing a law review article right now with the Touro Law Review and the Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism announcing the field — Jewish legal studies — and why it’s necessary.”

In October, the center will be part of a symposium at Northwestern University Prtizker School of Law focusing on international law.

“We going to have all these international law scholars talk about the genocide claims and apartheid claims, and crimes against women on Oct. 7, from an international law perspective,” Kaufman said.

In the meantime?

Kaufman said the center is “teaching courses at different law schools on antisemitism, Holocaust law. We’re filing amicus briefs. We’re working with students — we have four students interning with us, helping us with different projects. And hopefully soon, I’ll start preparing a trip to Israel for professors.”

Paris said that Kaufman and Martin — and the Center for Jewish Legal Studies — provide “clarity, leadership and education” at a time when the Jewish community faces unprecedented challenges.

“Their tireless advocacy ensures the Jewish community is not only heard but also fully protected under the law,” she said. “We also welcomed enthusiastically Andrea’s nomination to the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission following her overwhelming bipartisan confirmation in the state Senate. Together, we will continue fighting for the rights and safety of the Jewish community nationwide.” PJC

David Rullo can be reached at drullo@pittsburghjewishchronicle.org.