Trump Administration Settles Antisemitism and Other Discrimination Complaints with Columbia University, Brown University, and UCLA

Over the last two weeks, the Trump Administration entered into several agreements with higher education institutions, including Columbia University, Brown University, and UCLA, to settle allegations of antisemitism and discrimination on campus. We summarize the agreements below.

Columbia University Settlement

On July 23, 2025, Columbia University (“Columbia”) and the Trump Administration (“Administration”) reached a settlement agreement after months of negotiations arising from allegations of antisemitism on campus and the Administration’s resulting freeze of federal funding and grant monies.

Background

In March 2025, the Trump Administration froze more than $400 million of Columbia’s federal grant funding, citing allegations that the University failed to respond to antisemitism on campus. At the time of the funding freeze, there were no official findings regarding the allegations. Then, in May, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and U.S. Department of Education (DOE) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) jointly issued findings that Columbia violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) by “acting with deliberate indifference towards student-on-student harassment” of Jewish students from October 7, 2023, through the present. A month later, the U.S. Department of Education informed Columbia that it would notify the University’s accrediting commission that it failed to meet accreditation standards due to its noncompliance with federal law.

The Settlement Agreement

Following extensive negotiations, Columbia and the Trump Administration entered into an agreement that will implement reforms in admissions, academic programs, and disciplinary processes. In exchange, Columbia’s access to most federal funding will resume. While Columbia expressly denied liability regarding the allegations and investigation findings, it agreed to pay the federal government $200 million, as well as an additional $21 million to settle an investigation launched by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regarding claims of workplace harassment based on religion.

The parties also agreed to appoint  an independent resolution monitor (“Resolution Monitor”) to assess and report Columbia’s compliance with the terms of the agreement. Columbia will submit semi-annual reports to the Resolution Monitor and also appoint an administrator who will be primarily responsible for monitoring internal compliance with the settlement agreement and working to provide the Resolution Monitor with requested information.

In addition to these monetary components of the agreement and appointment of a Resolution Monitor, Columbia agreed to:

A. Address Antisemitism

• Maintain a Senior Vice Provost who will ensure that the educational offerings of Columbia’s programs in regional areas are “comprehensive and balanced”; review “all aspects of leadership and curriculum,” including the review process for approving curricular changes; partner with the Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs to create a standardized review process for the hiring of non-tenured faculty; and, coordinate the creation of new programs.
• Appoint an administrator as a Student Liaison to support the wellbeing of Jewish students on campus by reporting to University leaders issues of antisemitism and recommending ways to improve student life for Jewish students.
• Appoint new faculty members with joint positions in both the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies and the departments or fields of economics, political science, or Columbia’s School for International and Public Affairs (SIPA).

B. Maintain Equitable Admissions and Hiring Practices

• Uphold merit-based admissions and hiring processes by not maintaining programs that promote unlawful efforts to achieve race-based outcomes, quotas, diversity targets, or similar efforts.
• Not consider race, color, or national origin in admissions decisions. This includes not utilizing personal statements, diversity narratives, or any applicant’s reference to racial identity as a “proxy” for race.
• Maintain hiring and promotion practices for faculty and administrators “grounded solely in individual qualifications and academic and personal merit,” without the “use of race, color, sex, or national origin as a factor—implicit or explicit—in hiring decisions across all schools, departments, and programs.”
• Review the University’s international admissions processes and policies and ensure that “international student-applicants are asked questions designed to elicit their reasons for wishing to study in the United States.”
• Provide the Resolution Monitor with admissions data showing rejected and admitted students categorized by race, color, grade point average, and standardized test scores, as well as data regarding faculty and administrative hiring and promotion practices, which will be subject to a comprehensive audit.

C. Review and Update University Policies Governing Disciple

• Ensure objectivity and impartiality of Columbia’s student disciplinary body—the University Judicial Board (UJB)—by limiting UJB membership to faculty and administrators and requiring all members to undergo a rigorous vetting and conflict review process.
• Maintain policies that prohibit demonstrations and other protest activities that “occur inside academic buildings and places where academic activities take place” on the ground that such activities “present a direct impediment to maintaining Columbia’s core academic mission”; clarify that such activities are subject to Columbia’s anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies; limit the use of masks or face coverings and masks for the purpose of concealing identity during protests; and, subject students to discipline for failing to comply with face mask/covering policies.

While Columbia agreed to comply with the obligations of the agreement concerning reforms on campus and federal government oversight, the agreement explicitly clarifies that “[n]o provision of this Agreement…shall be construed as giving the United States authority to dictate faculty hiring, University hiring, admission decisions, or the content of academic speech.”

Brown University Settlement Agreement

On July 30, 2025, Brown University (“Brown”) reached a voluntary agreement with the Trump Administration to restore federal funding and resolve three pending federal agency reviews concerning Brown’s compliance with federal antidiscrimination laws.

Background

In 2024, the DOE’s OCR launched an investigation into Brown’s compliance with antidiscrimination laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI). Several other federal agencies followed suit. In April 2025, the Trump Administration froze federal funding for the University’s federally sponsored medical and health sciences research. To date, despite the funding freeze, the reviews remain open and no investigation or audit findings have been issued.

In a letter to the Brown community, President Christina H. Paxton noted that, while some aspects of the agreement directly addressed issues under review by the federal agencies, “other aspects . . . were not part of previous federal reviews of Brown policies but are priorities of the federal administration in resolving the funding freeze.” President Paxton further explained that because Brown University has faced both financial challenges and increasing governmental pressure to enforce compliance with laws addressing antisemitism and discrimination, raising concerns about academic freedom, the University chose to voluntarily enter into a formal agreement in order to affirm its dual commitment to upholding legal and ethical responsibilities while continuing to protect academic freedom and freedom of expression for its community.

The Settlement Agreement

Like Columbia, the agreement expressly provides that Brown does not admit  to liability regarding the federal government’s allegations of discrimination. However, to avoid further disputes that could arise from the reviews, and in exchange for restoring federal funds and grant monies, Brown agreed to pay $50 million over 10 years to support workforce development organizations in Rhode Island. The federal government will not receive any payments or fines under this agreement.

In addition to the monetary components of the agreement, Brown agreed to:

A. Comply with the Administration’s Title IX Definitions

• Define “male” and “female” for the purpose of all University practices, policies, and procedures, including Brown athletics, consistent with the definitions adopted in Executive Order 14168, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and resorting Biological Truth to the Federal Government and Executive Order 14201, Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports. Both Executive Orders define “male” and “female” to correspond to one’s biological classification at conception.
• Offer housing, shower, and restroom access in a manner that allows male-only and female-only options.
• Not perform gender reassignment surgery or prescribe puberty blockers or hormones to any minor child for the purpose of aligning the child’s appearance with an identity that differs from their sex.

B. Address Antisemitism

• Ensure that research and education about Israel remain part of the curricular offerings and sustain a robust program in Judaic Studies.
• Continue outreach activities to Jewish Day School students across the country regarding applying to Brown.
• Provide enhanced resources for religiously observant members of the Jewish community and enhanced security at Brown-RISD Hillel.
• Engage an external party to conduct a survey in 2025 to evaluate the campus climate for Brown students, including the climate for students with shared Jewish ancestry, and to evaluate social media harassment.

C. Maintain Equitable Admissions Practices

• Like Columbia, maintain merit-based admissions practices that do not consider applicants’ race, color, or national origin, directly or by proxy.
• Provide the federal government with admissions data showing rejected and admitted students categorized by race, color, grade point average, and standardized test scores, consistent with the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and its implementing regulations.

Similar to the Columbia agreement, the Agreement states that “[n]o provision…shall be construed as giving the United States authority to dictate Brown’s curriculum or the content of academic speech.”

UCLA Settlement Agreement

On July 29, 2025, the University of California, Los Angeles (“UCLA”) reached a settlement agreement with Jewish students, a Jewish professor, and the Trump Administration after the students and professor filed a private lawsuit against UCLA alleging civil rights violations.

Background

In 2024, three Jewish students and a Jewish professor filed a lawsuit against UCLA alleging that the University violated their civil rights by allowing pro-Palestinian protestors to block their access to classes and other campus spaces. In response to the lawsuit, a U.S. District Court Judge issued a preliminary injunction ordering UCLA to develop a plan to protect Jewish students on campus and afford them full and equal access to UCLA programs, activities, and facilities. In March 2025, the Trump Administration joined the lawsuit.

On July 29, 2025, UCLA settled the lawsuit. That same day, the Trump Administration issued a Notice of Violation and announced that the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division found that UCLA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by “acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.”  The Trump Administration subsequently froze $339 million in federal research grants following these findings.

The Settlement Agreement

UCLA agreed to pay over $6 million to settle the lawsuit, including $50,000 to each plaintiff and $3.6 million to cover their legal fees. An additional $2.3 million will go toward Jewish-focused nonprofit organizations and $320,000 will be allocated to a UCLA initiative to combat antisemitism. UCLA also agreed to grant Jewish students, faculty, and staff equal access to UCLA’s programs, activities, and campus areas.

Funding Freezes and Settlement Agreements as Future Model to Address Discrimination Claims

The Trump Administration indicated that it intends to use the Columbia agreement, in particular, as a “roadmap” for its dealings with institutions of higher education. Specifically, Education Secretary Linda McMachon stated that “Columbia’s reforms are a roadmap for elite universities that wish to regain the confidence of the American public by renewing their commitment to truth‑seeking, merit and civil debate,” adding “I believe they will ripple across the higher education sector and change the course of campus culture for years to come.”  In fact, while UCLA settled the private lawsuit last week, the Administration’s subsequent finding of civil rights violations and freeze of research funds suggest it will seek to engage in similar negotiations tactics with UCLA to broaden the scope of UCLA’s concessions beyond the terms of the current settlement.

Liebert Cassidy Whitmore attorneys are closely monitoring developments in relation to this Special Bulletin and will provide updates as they arise. If you have any questions about this issue, please contact our Los Angeles, San Francisco, Fresno, San Diego, or Sacramento office.

This Special Bulletin was prepared by Partner Alysha Stein-Manes and Summer Associate Lizette Nuno.