PHILADELPHIA - A federal judge has tossed a lawsuit by a group of Jewish students at Haverford College who alleged they faced anti-Semitism on campus.
Philadelphia federal judge Gerald McHugh on Jan. 6 granted Haverford's motion to dismiss, allowing the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint only if they "file a tailored pleading that directly and specifically addresses the elements of the claims."
McHugh wrote the plaintiffs, which include a group known as Jews at Haverford, did not submit a "legally cognizable complaint."
"At this stage, a court would typically review the relevant facts," McHugh wrote. "I cannot cogently do so here due to the sprawling and disorganized character of Plaintiffs' amended complaint, which appears to detail every frustration and disagreement of Jewish students and faculty that has occurred at Haverford over the last year."
Ally Landau and other students who proceeded anonymously in the original complaint said the private liberal arts school created a hostile environment for Jewish students supporting Israel, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
Jews have experienced a fear of harassment if they express beliefs about Israel, they claimed, adding they hide their attendance at religious services.
"While Israel-hating students march across the campus chanting quotes from the terrorist group Hamas calling for Israel's destruction - as they have done frequently and without any restraint or interference from the Administration - these Jewish students hide in their rooms, felling unable even to go to class or to engage in any of the other activities that constitute the life of an undergraduate," the suit says.
The suit adds that the college administration has repeatedly permitted this conduct to transpire, at the expense of Jewish students and in support of those holding opposing political and social viewpoints.
Haverford College filed a motion to dismiss the case on July 15, for failure to state claims upon which relief could be granted – and referring to anti-Semitism as “antithetical to the College’s core values.”
A fear of speaking about Israel is not actionable in federal court, the college said - "there is a difference between conduct that offends and conduct we litigate."
McHugh agreed, complaining the lawsuit "spills pages of ink on lengthy frolics about events on other college campuses." What the suit did not do is isolate instances of harassment and linking them to a claim for hostile environment, he said.
Though some of the instances alleged concern him and could support a Title VI claim if pled properly, McHugh said the complaint reads more like an op-ed.
"(T)he complaint is diluted by instances that no reasonable person could construe as intentional discrimination," he wrote.
The grievances include the college not announcing May as American Jewish History Month, instead choosing to celebrate Asian American/Pacific Islander Month, and graduands wearing attire that supports Palestine.
McHugh called that protected First Amendment speech.
"Plaintiffs also dedicate a full eight pages of their Complaint to their effort to link Judaism to Zionism, while simultaneously insisting that they are not asking the Court to resolve any religious issues," McHugh wrote.
"Plaintiffs' equivocation is disingenuous, but likely strategic, seeking to blur the link between Zionism as a political philosophy and Zionism as a component of Jewish identity, and in the process implicitly sweep any and all criticism of Israel into the basket of anti-Semitism.
"I reject Plaintiffs' embedded proposition that any anti-Israel speech is intrinsically anti-Semitic, because reasonable people acting in good faith can challenge decisions of the Israeli government without harboring anti-Semitic views."
The plaintiffs are represented by Jerome M. Marcus of Marcus & Marcus, in Merion Station.
The defendant is represented by Jamie R. Schumacher and Nathan P. Venesky of Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr, in Philadelphia.