A federal judge recently ordered the University of Pennsylvania to provide the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) with a list of Jewish community members. This move aims to address antisemitism on the campus, a concern that has intensified following protests over Israel’s actions since the October 7 Hamas attacks.
Penn initially resisted the subpoena, worrying it might invade the privacy of its Jewish faculty and staff. Many in the Jewish community felt the government’s request echoed darker periods in history, raising alarm about the potential implications of collecting personal information.
The judge, Gerald Pappert, ruled that despite being poorly framed, the request had merit. He noted the EEOC’s intention was to identify individuals who may have faced or witnessed antisemitism, not to create a register of Jewish people.
Despite the ruling, Penn plans to appeal. A spokesperson emphasized that they don’t categorize employees by religion and expressed concerns about privacy rights and First Amendment freedoms. The university began a Task Force on Antisemitism to address worries about rising discrimination but found it was not enough for the EEOC.
Beth Wenger, a Jewish historian at Penn, voiced her disappointment with the court’s decision. She highlighted that the government’s actions raise broader concerns about privacy for all, not just Jewish individuals.
Amanda Shanor, a professor at the Wharton School who represents some Penn community members, outlined the challenges involved. She explained that identifying Jewish employees is complex because religious affiliations aren’t routinely logged like race or gender. Many people don’t disclose their faith at work.
In defense of the subpoena, an attorney for the EEOC argued it was a standard part of their investigation. The attorney dismissed fears of a “central registry” of Jews as political rhetoric, insisting that the inquiry was crucial for understanding the hostile environment faced by some employees.
The situation at Penn reflects a growing tension around how universities handle discussions of antisemitism and broader issues of free speech. As the appeal process continues, it raises significant questions about privacy, safety, and the role of government in religious communities.
For more information on how these issues are being handled nationally, see this report from the Pew Research Center on religious discrimination.
