
UCLA reaches $6 million settlement with Jewish students and professor over campus protests
The settlement comes nearly a year after a preliminary injunction was issued, marking the first time a US judge had ruled against a university over their handling of on-campus demonstrations against Israel's war in Gaza.
UCLA initially had argued that it had no legal responsibility over the issue because protesters, not the university, blocked Jewish students' access to areas. The university also worked with law enforcement to thwart attempts to set up new protest camps.
But U.S. District Judge Mark Scarsi disagreed and ordered UCLA to create a plan to protect Jewish students on campus. The University of California, one of the nation's largest public university systems, has since created systemwide campus guidelines on protests.
How the university handled dispersing the encampment in the spring drew widespread criticism. One night, counterprotesters attacked the pro-Palestinian encampment, throwing traffic cones and firing pepper spray, with fighting that continued for hours, injuring more than a dozen people, before police stepped in. The next day, after hundreds defied orders to leave, more than 200 people were arrested.
In March, the Trump administration joined the lawsuit filed by the Jewish students and Jewish professor as it opened new investigations into allegations of antisemitism at Columbia University; the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Minnesota; Northwestern University and Portland State University.
Last week, Columbia agreed to pay $200 million as part of a settlement to resolve investigations into alleged violations of federal antidiscrimination laws and restore more than $400 million in research grants.
The Trump administration plans to use its deal with Columbia as a template for other universities, with financial penalties that are now seen as an expectation for future agreements.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division found UCLA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 'by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.'
'UCLA failed to take timely and appropriate action in response to credible claims of harm and hostility on its campus,' said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.
The university has said that it's committed to campus safety and will continue to implement recommendations.
'Today's settlement reflects a critically important goal that we share with the plaintiffs: to foster a safe, secure and inclusive environment for all members of our community and ensure that there is no room for antisemitism anywhere on campus,' University of California Board of Regents Chair Janet Reilly said in a statement.
As part of the settlement agreement, UCLA must ensure Jewish students, faculty and staff are not excluded from anything on-campus.
The $6.13 million settlement will pay the plaintiffs' damages and legal fees. About $2.3 million will go to eight organizations that combat antisemitism, the university said.
A group of 35 pro-Palestinian students, faculty members, legal observers, journalists and activists also has filed a lawsuit against UCLA, alleging the university failed to protect those who participated in the demonstrations. Some Jewish students have also taken part in protests on campuses around the country against Israel's war in Gaza.
During the 2014 protests at UCLA, at least 15 pro-Palestinian protesters were injured and the tepid response by authorities drew criticism from political leaders as well as Muslim students and advocacy groups.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Mint
26 minutes ago
- Mint
‘More likely to happen in Lagaan': Harsh Goenka takes swipe at Donald Trump over ‘Pakistan may sell oil to India' remark
RPG Group Chairman Harsh Goenka has reacted to President Donald Trump's announcement on the US-Pakistan trade deal. He compared the idea of Pakistan selling oil to India to cricket and the popular Bollywood film Lagaan, while stating it to be possible in theory but unrealistic in practice. In a post on the social media platform X, Goenka wrote, 'Saying Pakistan will sell oil to India is like saying a tailender will hit a triple century in a T20 match. Technically possible. Realistically? More likely to happen in Lagaan than in real life.' Goenka's post comes after Donald Trump announced a trade deal with Pakistan on his official TruthSocial handle. "We have just concluded a Deal with the Country of Pakistan, whereby Pakistan and the United States will work together on developing their massive Oil Reserves,' Trump wrote. He highlighted a possibility of Pakistan expanding regional trade and noted, 'Who knows, maybe they'll be selling Oil to India some day!' Several social media users have reacted to Goenka's post, sharing their opinion on Trump's announcement. One of the users wrote, 'Fiction has limits, Sir... this one crossed genres.' Another user stated, 'Sure definitely looking forward to the same. Payment will be made in Cash in old ₹ 1000 bills that India has absolutely abolished.' 'Mind games at play!' noted one of the users. In another post on X, Goenka also responded to Trump's announcement on imposing 25 per cent tariffs on Indian goods, while assuring that there is no need to panic. '25% tariff? Sounds steep. But no need to panic. India, in fact, remains better positioned than many peers, barring a few like Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia and South Korea,' he wrote. 'And knowing India Inc, we will do what we do best- find innovative workarounds, turn adversity into advantage, and bring some classic jugaad into play. And who knows, with some clever diplomacy….might just become part of the next trade meal deal," Goenka added.


India.com
28 minutes ago
- India.com
US Pakistan oil deal reality: How Pakistan is fooling Donald Trump with 'empty' oil reserves, Trump will be unhappy because...
Pakistan vs US How Pakistan is fooling USA: President Trump recently announced that the US has signed an agreement with Pakistan under which the two countries will jointly develop huge oil reserves. However, the world knows that Pakistan does not have significant proven oil reserves. More importantly, the country remains heavily dependent on energy imports, and while some exploration is underway in regions like Sindh and Balochistan, no major discoveries have been made. Experts view that even as US President Donald Trump said in a social media post that the US has signed a deal to develop and explore 'massive oil reserves' in Pakistan, the ground reality is that the neighbouring nation has very limited oil and gas reserves and meets 85 per cent of its requirement through imports. What data says about proven oil reserves in Pakistan? According to Worldometer data, Pakistan had 353.5 million barrels of proven oil reserves as of 2016, placing it 52nd globally and accounting for just 0.021 per cent of the world's total reserves. At current consumption levels of about 556,000 barrels per day, these reserves would cover less than two years of domestic demand if the country does not import oil, according to Worldometer data. As per data quoted by IANS news agency, the daily oil production is around 70,000–80,000 barrels per day, which covers only about 15–20 per cent of its own consumption. It is also being said that China or any other country has not looked at Pakistan's gas-oil reserves till now because Pakistan doesn't have the viable resources. What's the exploration success rate in Pakistan? The exploration success rate in Pakistan is low, and political, financial, and security concerns are a major concern for investors. The refining capacity in Pakistan is also limited and aging, the Indian Oil official said. On Truth Social, Trump announced a deal with Pakistan to help it with development and exploration of oil reserves. 'We have just concluded a Deal with the Country of Pakistan, whereby Pakistan and the United States will work together on developing their massive Oil Reserves…We are in the process of choosing the Oil Company that will lead this Partnership. Who knows, maybe they'll be selling Oil to India some day!' he wrote on social media. (With inputs from agencies)


India.com
28 minutes ago
- India.com
India-US trade deal: US says Trump 'frustrated' with India due to...; Rubio flags India-Russia oil trade as 'point of irritation', says...
(File) India-US trade deal: US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Thursday said that President Donald Trump and the whole trade negotiation team have been 'frustrated' with India over the trade talks, even as Secretary of State Marco Rubio flagged New Delhi's purchases of Russian oil as a 'point of irritation' in India-US relations. 'Well, I don't know what's going to happen. It will be up to India. India came to the table early. They've been slow rolling things. So I think that the President, the whole trade team, has been frustrated with them,' Bessent said in an interview with CNBC. He also said India has been a large buyer of sanctioned Russian oil, which they then resell as refined products. 'So, they have not been a great global actor,' he added. Bessent's comments came a day after Trump announced the imposition of a 25 per cent tariff on all goods coming from India starting August 1, plus an unspecified penalty for buying Russian crude oil and military equipment. 'Point of irritation' in India-US ties Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday claimed that India's oil purchases are helping Moscow to sustain its war efforts in Ukraine, and said it is 'most certainly a point of irritation' in New Delhi's relationship with Washington. 'Look, global trade – India is an ally. It's a strategic partner. Like anything in foreign policy, you're not going to align 100 per cent of the time on everything,' Rubio said in an interview with Fox Radio. Rubio acknowledged India has 'huge energy needs and that includes the ability to buy oil and coal and gas and things that it needs to power its economy like every country does, and it buys it from Russia, because Russian oil is sanctioned and cheap and – meaning they have to – in many cases, they're selling it under the global price because of the sanctions.' He added that 'unfortunately, that is helping to sustain the Russian war effort. So it is most certainly a point of irritation in our relationship with India – not the only point of irritation. We also have many other points of cooperation with them. 'But I think what you're seeing the President express is the very clear frustration that with so many other oil vendors available, India continues to buy so much from Russia, which in essence is helping to fund the war effort' and allowing this war to continue in Ukraine. Trump tariffs on India The comments by top Trump administration officials came a day after Donald Trump announced the imposition of a 25 per cent tariff on all goods coming from India starting August 1, plus an unspecified penalty for buying Russian crude oil and military equipment. Trump's surprise announcement on Wednesday is being seen as a pressure tactic to get New Delhi to agree to demands made by the US, which has, in recent days, got favourable trade deals with major partners like Japan, the UK and the European Union. India has said it will take all necessary steps to safeguard and promote national interest and that the implications of the tariffs are being examined. (With PTI inputs)