A former Department of Justice attorney has alleged that investigations into U.S. universities over accusations of antisemitism, initiated during the Trump administration, were conducted without sufficient evidence and had predetermined outcomes.
The claims are detailed in a whistleblower complaint filed by Haley Van Erem, a former career attorney in the DOJ's civil rights division, and were made public by U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin. The complaint asserts that these investigations were characterized by "extraordinary procedural irregularities, predetermined outcomes without factual or legal support, and disregard" for legal requirements and free speech rights.
The complaint also notes that proposals to investigate allegations of anti-Muslim bias on university campuses, suggested by Van Erem and colleagues, were not pursued by leadership. This contrasts with the Trump administration's focus on alleged antisemitism, which often targeted universities with probes and threats of federal funding suspension in response to pro-Palestinian protests.
While the DOJ spokesperson stated that the department stands behind the integrity of these investigations and that Ms. Van Erem did not work on university probes, the complaint details concerns that investigative practices were departed from, potentially lacking factual predicates for opening cases. It also suggests that some assignees perceived certain interview mandates as attempts to intimidate professors, based on "Islamophobic assumptions" rather than actual evidence of antisemitism complaints.
These probes occurred amidst broader government actions targeting universities over diversity initiatives and other policies. Several institutions have reached settlements with the government, while others, such as Harvard University, have publicly criticized the probes as potentially retaliatory.
