Sussman, et al. v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Summary

On March 7, 2024, a federal civil rights lawsuit was filed on behalf of William Sussman, a former PhD student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and member of The Louis D. Brandeis Center Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism; Lior Alon, a postdoctoral associate and instructor at MIT and member of the Coalition; and The Louis D. Brandeis Center Coalition itself, a nonprofit organization advocating for Jewish students, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts against MIT. The plaintiffs alleged that MIT tolerated antisemitic harassment and discrimination during pro-Palestinian protests following the October 7, 2023 attack in Israel. They claimed that students and faculty expressing pro-Israel or Jewish identities were verbally harassed, targeted on social media, excluded from events, and subjected to hostile conduct during campus demonstrations. The complaint described incidents including protesters chanting “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” near Jewish students, posting statements on social media calling Israeli students complicit in military actions, and displaying signs accusing Jewish students of supporting war crimes. The plaintiffs asserted that MIT failed to investigate or discipline the conduct.

The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on May 17, 2024, adding causes of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1986, negligence, and breach of contract, and seeking class action status for all Jewish and/or Israeli students at MIT. MIT moved to dismiss on June 14, 2024, arguing that much of the alleged conduct involved political speech and public demonstrations, including chants, signs, and social media posts advocating for Palestinian rights, which were protected under the First Amendment. MIT also noted that it had policies for reporting harassment and had responded to complaints. The district court granted the motion on July 30, 2024, dismissing most allegations against MIT and all claims against individual defendants and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims.

Plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. On October 21, 2025, the First Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment, holding that most protest activity, including chants, signs, and social media posts, constituted political speech protected under the First Amendment. Statements such as “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and posts critical of Israeli government policies did not meet the threshold for severe or pervasive harassment under Title VI, and MIT was not deliberately indifferent. The court also affirmed dismissal of the § 1986 claim.

Plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing en banc on November 25, 2025, which the First Circuit denied on January 21, 2026. A separate concurrence noted that protected political expression, including campus demonstrations and social media advocacy, does not automatically constitute actionable harassment, and universities are not required to restrict political speech to prevent claims of discrimination. A separate claim within the same lawsuit, brought by an anonymous plaintiff (“John Doe”), remained pending after the dismissals, and without further motions to dismiss, this part of the case is expected to proceed to trial later in 2026.