DOJ Scrutiny of Universities Intensifies
The U.S. Department of Justice is increasing its civil rights scrutiny of higher education institutions. Assistant AG Harmeet Dhillon announced impending litigation against Harvard for withholding admissions data. Concurrently, the DOJ has launched a "pattern or practice" investigation into antisemitism at the University of California system under Title VII, signaling broad federal willingness to investigate universities for systemic civil rights failures.
- The investigation into the University of California system is a "pattern or practice" inquiry, which authorizes the DOJ to investigate systemic and widespread discrimination by state and local government employers. This investigation is being conducted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. - Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon is leading a significant shift in the Civil Rights Division's priorities, moving away from its traditional focus on combating racial discrimination and toward addressing antisemitism, diversity initiatives, and what she terms "anti-Christian bias." Under her leadership, the division has seen a significant number of attorneys depart. - The DOJ's legal action against Harvard is rooted in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs receiving federal funding. The Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is responsible for enforcing Title VI in educational institutions and can refer cases to the DOJ. - The scrutiny of universities extends beyond admissions and antisemitism to include race- and sex-based employment practices. The DOJ has opened a separate investigation into the University of California system regarding its "UC 2030 Capacity Plan," which directs campuses to hire "diverse" faculty to meet race- and sex-based employment quotas. - While the DOJ is increasing civil rights enforcement, it has also faced legal challenges. A federal court invalidated the Department of Education's guidance that reinterpreted Title VI in light of the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action, which had discouraged race-conscious educational programming. - Public colleges and universities are also facing an April 24, 2026, deadline to comply with a new DOJ rule under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This rule mandates that their websites, apps, and digital content meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA, making digital accessibility a clear and enforceable standard. - Universities found in violation of Title VI risk losing federal funding, although this is a rare outcome. More commonly, institutions face corrective action plans, multi-year monitoring, and significant reputational damage. There is also proposed legislation that would impose fines of 10% to 33% of a school's federal funding for multiple Title VI violations within a five-year period. - The DOJ is also utilizing the False Claims Act to target universities that allegedly make false certifications of compliance with civil rights laws while receiving federal funds. This initiative could lead to treble damages and significant financial penalties for institutions found liable.
