U.S. DOJ Lawsuit Accuses UCLA of Failing to Protect Jewish Students During 2024 Antisemitic Violence

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against the University of California system on May 27, 2026, alleging that UCLA allowed a hostile environment to develop on its campus, with anti‑Israel demonstrators physically attacking Jewish and Israeli students in 2024. The suit claims that demonstrators used sticks, pepper spray, and other blunt objects to beat students, resulting in hospitalizations and physical injuries.

The alleged violence centered on Royce Quad, a highly trafficked area of UCLA, where a group known as Students for Justice Palestine and other anti‑Israel campus groups established an encampment on April 25, 2024. Protestors constructed barricades of plywood and bicycle racks, blocked access to key academic buildings, and singled out Jewish students for aggression. Video footage and police reports documented students being kicked, slapped, and pepper‑sprayed, with one student sustaining an open head wound that required medical attention.

According to the lawsuit, UCLA officials were unaware of the full extent of the unrest until mid‑2025, when it had already escalated. The university’s delayed response, the police’s reportedly passive stance, and the alleged participation of faculty members in the protest are highlighted as violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on national‑origin grounds in federally funded schools.

In the same month, Governor Jim Pillen announced he would sign an executive order establishing statewide standards for reporting and combating antisemitism. The order seeks to centralise accountability and give state entities clearer guidelines for protecting students from hate‑based violence.

University officials have denied any systemic failure, stating that the encampment was declared illegal on April 30, 2024, and that the administration took “serious steps” to ensure campus safety. Nonetheless, the lawsuit underscores the growing legal scrutiny of higher‑education institutions’ responses to campus hate crimes and the broader debate over free‑speech limits, campus security, and civil‑rights protection.