The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a civil rights lawsuit against the University of California, accusing UCLA of failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students from antisemitic harassment and discrimination on campus after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleges that UCLA violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by showing “deliberate indifference” to what the department describes as a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students. Title VI bars federally funded institutions from discriminating on the basis of race, color or national origin.

The Justice Department said its Civil Rights Division brought the case after investigating reports of antisemitic incidents at UCLA and concluding that the university had not fulfilled its legal obligations. The department’s complaint accuses UCLA of allowing Jewish and Israeli students to be physically assaulted, excluded from parts of campus and deprived of educational opportunities because of their perceived Jewish or Israeli heritage.

In a statement announcing the lawsuit, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon said the department had already sued UCLA earlier this year over allegations involving Jewish and Israeli employees and was now seeking to hold the university accountable for what DOJ called an “equally appalling hostile educational environment” affecting students. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California said universities have a duty to maintain safe and inclusive campuses for all students.

The complaint centers in part on events in spring 2024, when pro-Palestinian demonstrators established an encampment on UCLA’s campus. DOJ alleges that masked demonstrators outside Royce Hall assaulted Jewish and Israeli students and that groups of protesters blocked them from entering academic buildings and other campus spaces. The department also says UCLA’s Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion received more than 100 complaints about antisemitism and anti-Israeli hostility but failed to respond meaningfully.

UCLA and the broader University of California system are sharply disputing the federal government’s framing. UC President James B. Milliken said Tuesday that the Board of Regents and university leadership have been “unequivocal” that antisemitism has no place at UC. He said the system has instituted reforms and programs to promote safety and combat antisemitism, and argued that the new lawsuit does not recognize that work.

“This litigation — and other actions taken by the federal government targeting the University of California — does nothing to aid our ongoing efforts to address antisemitism and create safe and welcoming campus environments for all members of our community,” Milliken said in the UC statement.

UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk also rejected DOJ’s allegation that the university had been passive. In a statement reported by Higher Ed Dive and student outlet the Daily Bruin, Frenk said the suggestion that UCLA had been passive in the face of antisemitism was “simply wrong.” He pointed to several steps UCLA says it has taken, including reorganizing its civil rights office, appointing a Title VI officer, recruiting a senior official focused on campus and community safety, and advancing an initiative to combat antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias.

The Justice Department is seeking remedies that could reach well beyond a finding of liability. According to Higher Ed Dive, DOJ asked the court to order UCLA to repay federal grants it received while allegedly noncompliant with Title VI and to allow the government to stop paying remaining funds on existing federal grants. The department is also seeking broad policy changes, including procedures for timely discipline, stronger complaint investigations and coordination with law enforcement when protesters allegedly block campus access or occupy buildings and outdoor spaces after orders to disperse.

The lawsuit also seeks court oversight. DOJ wants the court to appoint a monitor, subject to government approval and collaboration, to oversee UCLA’s compliance, audit the university, report to the court and federal officials, and recommend corrective actions. Such a remedy would represent a substantial federal role in campus governance at one of the country’s most prominent public research universities.

The case is part of a larger confrontation between the Trump administration and major universities over antisemitism, campus protest, civil rights compliance and federal funding. UCLA has already faced federal scrutiny and litigation over related allegations. Higher Ed Dive reported that Tuesday’s suit follows earlier DOJ action alleging a hostile work environment for Jewish and Israeli employees, and that both complaints named the UC system’s regents as the defendant rather than UCLA itself.

The dispute also arrives after a turbulent period for UCLA and other campuses where Israel-Gaza war protests prompted clashes among students, administrators, police and outside political actors. UCLA’s encampment drew national attention in 2024 after confrontations on campus and a police clearance that resulted in more than 200 arrests, according to the Daily Bruin. Protest organizers have denied that the encampment was antisemitic, while Jewish students and advocacy groups have argued that university officials failed to protect equal access to campus facilities.

For higher education leaders, the UCLA lawsuit raises a difficult operational and legal question: how to protect students from discrimination while also managing protest activity, free speech claims, public safety obligations and institutional neutrality expectations. The federal government’s theory focuses on whether UCLA responded adequately once it had notice of alleged harassment. UC’s response emphasizes reforms, new staffing and ongoing efforts to improve campus climate.

The legal stakes are heightened by UCLA’s reliance on federal support. Higher Ed Dive reported that the university’s former chief financial officer said in early 2025 that UCLA receives more than $1 billion annually from the federal government for contracts and grants, plus overhead. Any court order affecting federal funds or requiring repayment would carry major implications for research operations, staffing and academic programs.

The case is likely to be watched closely across California and nationally, particularly by universities facing similar Title VI complaints tied to antisemitism, anti-Israeli bias, Islamophobia, anti-Palestinian discrimination and protest-related campus safety disputes. While DOJ is presenting the matter as an enforcement action to protect Jewish and Israeli students, UC is framing the suit as an unnecessary escalation that overlooks ongoing institutional changes.

The lawsuit will now proceed in federal court, where the government must prove that UCLA’s response to alleged harassment and exclusion violated civil rights law. UC, meanwhile, is expected to argue that the university has taken concrete steps to combat antisemitism and that federal intervention on the scale sought by DOJ is unwarranted.