EEOC Accuses Penn of Defying Subpoena

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accused the University of Pennsylvania of waging an “intensive and relentless public relations campaign” to avoid complying with a subpoena related to an investigation into antisemitism, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.

The EEOC made the claim in a court filing on Monday, accusing the Ivy League university of impeding its investigation. The federal government is seeking information about Jewish students and employees, which the EEOC claims is necessary to identify potential victims and witnesses.

The federal government initially requested the list in July.

Penn, in a Jan. 20 legal filing, called the request an “extraordinary and unconstitutional demand that Penn assemble and produce lists of employees that reveal their Jewish faith or ancestry, associations with Jewish organizations, affiliation with Jewish studies, participation in programming for the Jewish community and/or de-anonymized responses to surveys on antisemitism, alongside their personal home addresses, phone numbers, and emails.”

The federal government’s request for a list of Jewish students and employees has unnerved some in the university community who doubt the Trump administration is acting in good faith.

Jewish students, scholars and the Penn chapter of the American Association of University Professors have pushed back on the EEOC’s demand. The national AAUP and AAUP-Penn filed a motion to intervene in the case, noting concerns about disclosing private information.

“As our motion notes, to demand that Penn create and compile lists of Jewish people—particularly those active in political causes disfavored by the government—evokes the disturbing history of twentieth-century antisemitism. Beyond Penn itself, this lawsuit has serious implications for the religious liberties of AAUP members nationwide, as well as their right to engage in speech and scholarship without the threat of ideological conformity,” the AAUP wrote in a news release. “The government does not have the right to demand the private, personal information of religious minorities. We are waiting for the court’s decision on our motion.”