The op-ed draws on my co-authored article on "Antisemitism, Anti-Zionism, and Title VI" with @hellmandeborah.bsky.social in the Harvard Law Review Forum, available here: harvardlawreview.org/forum/vol-13... (3/3)

Most glaringly, it treats speech acts (like putting an anti-Israel sign on your laptop) as discrimination against a group if they disproportionately _affect_ that group—no intent needed. This is a form of disparate impact, a linchpin of civil rights that Trump has pronounced unconstitutional. (2/3)

P.S. if somehow I missed what they're actually citing there, I will delete this. But I looked pretty hard before posting this and I really don't see it.

Is it possible OCR turned “As a Muslim woman who wears hijab, I have been spat on and harassed in multiple places on campus” into "reports of Jewish and Israeli students being spit on in the face for wearing a yarmulke"??

If so, that pretty well sums up the seriousness of this investigation. (3/3)

But the only mention of spitting in that part of the report is a complaint by a "Muslim woman who wears hijab." And there are no complaints of spitting anywhere else in the report either (though there's another mention of "spitting at pro-Palestinian demonstrators"). (2/3)

www.hhs.gov/sites/defaul...

But if the administration thinks "faculty members from the Harvard Law School ... are presumably familiar with legal evidentiary burdens of proof," they might be interested in one such faculty member's explanation of why these Title VI claims are very dubious: harvardlawreview.org/forum/vol-13...