Harvard University, as part of a settlement agreement to resolve two Title VI civil rights lawsuits levied against the school, will implement its most significant measures yet to protect Israeli and Jewish students from antisemitic discrimination on campus. 

“This is a watershed moment,” the leading authority on antisemitism and civil rights in higher education, Kenneth Marcus, tells the Sun. “This agreement is the strongest we’ve seen so far, and it marks a major victory for Jewish students.” 

In one of the most notable stipulations, the university will amend its non-discrimination and anti-bullying policies to include the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s definition of antisemitism, which embraces the connection between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. The standard explicitly includes, in its definition of an antisemitic act, denying Jews the right to self-determination by claiming, for example, that the existence of the State of Israel is a racist endeavor. 

In addition to adopting the association’s list of potentially antisemitic conduct, the school will offer its own examples in a supplementary “frequently asked questions” document listed alongside the policy. Examples of such conduct, Harvard notes, include “excluding Zionists from an open event, calling for the death of Zionists, applying a ‘no Zionist’ litmus test for participation in any Harvard activity, using or disseminating tropes, stereotypes, and conspiracies about Zionists (e.g., ‘Zionists control the media’), or demanding a person who is or is perceived to be Jewish or Israeli to state a position on Israel or Zionism to harass or discriminate.”

Harvard’s embrace of the Holocaust association’s definition of antisemitism is “critically important,” Mr. Marcus tells the Sun. With this new approach, he says, “Harvard is acknowledging that a rule against Zionists is a rule against Jews.”

Mr. Marcus, who founded the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which has advocated on behalf of Jewish students fighting antisemitism at numerous schools, predicts that the settlement will have far-reaching consequences. “Harvard has an outsized influence on higher education more broadly. We now have a Harvard standard that other colleges will strive to meet,” he tells the Sun. 

Harvard, as part of the agreement, will also prepare an annual report for the next five years that will detail and assess the school’s handling of discrimination or harassment complaints, including the school’s chosen disciplinary outcomes. Other provisions include funneling additional resources to the study of antisemitism and providing an undisclosed monetary sum to the plaintiffs as compensation. 

Additionally, in a major blow to anti-Israel activists calling for divestment, the school has agreed to establish an official partnership with a university in Israel. A fellow at the the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, which partners with universities to promote academic freedom, Steve McGuire, called the stipulation “particularly fitting” given that it “repudiates the intolerant demands of protesters” to boycott Israeli institutions, he tells the Sun. “It is wonderful to see the ‘student intifada’ continue to backfire so spectacularly,” Mr. McGuire says. 

The settlement puts an end to two lawsuits filed against the school over its mishandling of antisemitism after Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. The first suit was filed in January of last year by Students Against Antisemitism on behalf of six Jewish Harvard students who alleged that Harvard’s leaders allowed the school to become “a bastion of rampant anti-Jewish hatred and harassment” through “deliberate indifference” and “enablement.” 

The second lawsuit, filed in May by the Brandeis Center, accuses the university of  “deliberately” ignoring the growing presence of antisemitism on campus and creating “an unbearable educational environment” for Jewish students. “Through its public actions and failures to act, Harvard has made its position clear: Jews are fair game. Students and faculty can harass and discriminate against Jews, and they can do so openly and with impunity,” the suit complained.

Both lawsuits centered around Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prevents institutions that receive federal funding from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. In 2004, Mr. Marcus, while working as assistant secretary for the Department of Education, issued an official letter expanding the protection to include religious groups, like Jews. 

Harvard, in an official statement, commended the settlement as a reflection of “our dedication” to “ensuring our Jewish community is embraced, respected, and can thrive at Harvard.” The university, however, initially tried to have both suits dismissed, claiming that the “plaintiff’s dissatisfaction with the strategy and speed of Harvard’s essential work does not state a legally cognizable claim.” Both motions to dismiss ultimately failed. 

While Mr. McGuire celebrates the settlement as “welcome news,” he cautions against looking at the school’s about-face through rose-colored glasses. “The university no doubt settled now because it recognizes that its malfeasance will no longer be tolerated, so we should be skeptical that its leaders have experienced a genuine change of heart,” he tells the Sun. 

The settlement comes just one day after President Trump, who has promised to make higher education “great again,” took office for a second term. The timing, Mr. Marcus says, can hardly be chalked up as a coincidence. “No institution wants to have a case pending with a strong new president coming into office,” he tells the Sun. A number of other institutions, including Brown University and the University of California school system, have made moves to settle similar Title VI complaints in recent weeks. 

Harvard, though, has been gearing up for the turnover at Washington, D.C. In December, Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, during a closed door meeting with faculty, floated the idea of adopting a more cooperative approach to the Trump administration. He added that Harvard should listen to public criticism with “empathy and humility,” according to the Harvard Crimson.

Then, earlier this month, the university recruited a lobbying firm with ties to Mr. Trump and members of his incoming administration to spearhead the school’s “government relations and advocacy.”

Mr. Trump, for his part, has made clear his willingness to leverage federal funding against universities that fail to address campus antisemitism. Vice President Vance, meanwhile, has advocated for increasing the tax rate on university endowments to 35 percent from 1.4 percent. Mr. Garber has said that the possibility of such a tax, which would capture a sizable chunk of the school’s $53 billion endowment, “keeps me up at night.” 

As part of Harvard’s agreement with the plaintiffs, the school did not admit to any wrongdoing or liability. One of the plaintiffs behind the Students Against Antisemitism lawsuit, Shabbos Kestenbaum, refrained from accepting the settlement agreement and opted instead to pursue additional litigation with new counsel. Mr. Kestenbaum has not yet responded to the Sun’s request for comment.