Feds Open Title VI Probes Into San Jose State and San Francisco State Over Antisemitism Complaints

The Trump administration added two more California public universities to its list of Title VI investigations Thursday. The Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights opened probes into San Jose State University and San Francisco State University over allegations the schools let antisemitism fester on campus, according to the department.

The two schools serve roughly 60,000 students combined, according to JNS. OCR will determine whether either university violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination based on race, color or national origin at institutions receiving federal funding.

These are allegations, not findings. No charges, fines, or funding cuts have been issued against either school. The investigations are the process by which OCR will try to establish whether the claims hold up.

What's alleged

At San Jose State, complaints filed with OCR describe Jewish students being threatened, shunned and made to feel unwelcome in classrooms because of their Jewish ancestry, according to the Department of Education. The complaints say anti-Israel protests have disrupted classes and displaced students and staff, and that physical attacks on Jewish students have increased since Hamas's October 7, 2023 attack on Israel.

The department's announcement also cited an email it attributed to San Jose State's vice president for student affairs and former interim chief diversity officer, which allegedly distinguished between "good Jews" and "bad Jews" based on support for the Israeli government.

At San Francisco State, complaints allege faculty members used their positions to foster a hostile environment for Jewish students. OCR said it had been notified of antisemitic graffiti, attempted break-ins targeting Jewish students, and campus events featuring "extremists with terrorist group ties" hosted by the Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas program. The department also flagged the General Union of Palestine Students, which it identified as a branch of the Palestine Liberation Organization, a group Congress has designated a terrorist organization, as maintaining its last remaining student chapter at San Francisco State.

Jewish students described the campus climate at San Francisco State as one of "intimidation, exclusion, and fear," according to the department.

"Discrimination has no place on college campuses. The same California leaders who wax eloquent about their commitment to 'equity' and 'social justice' appear to turn their backs on violent, harmful acts of antisemitic intimidation and harassment," said Kimberly Richey, assistant secretary for civil rights at the Education Department.

The universities push back on a specific detail

Both schools say they take the complaints seriously. San Francisco State communications director Bobby King told JNS that "antisemitism and discrimination have no place at SFSU" and that the university is "committed to ensuring that every member of our community can study, teach, work and participate in university life free from discrimination and harassment."

San Jose State disputes something more specific: the "good Jews/bad Jews" quote itself. Michelle Smith McDonald, the university's senior director of strategic communications, told JNS the department's announcement contains a "misleading implication" and that "this statement was never made by any representative of the university." Reuters, via its wire report on the broader crackdown, confirmed San Jose State's denial and noted the university said it would respond through the department's investigative process.

If the quote can't be verified as coming from a university official, it undercuts one of the more inflammatory specifics OCR cited to justify the probe. The Education Department has not yet responded publicly to San Jose State's denial, according to JNS, which said it sought comment from the department.

The bigger picture

Thursday's announcement wasn't limited to antisemitism. The same day, the Department of Justice alleged that Duke University School of Law's admissions practices favored Black and Hispanic applicants over white and Asian applicants with comparable academic records, according to Reuters. The DOJ made similar allegations earlier this year against medical school admissions at the University of California and Yale. Duke said it is reviewing the DOJ's letter and remains "committed to complying with the law." The University of California and Yale have said their admissions practices are merit-based.

These moves build on a broader pattern. Earlier in 2026, OCR had already found San Jose State in violation of Title IX for allowing males to compete in women's sports and access female-only facilities, according to the Education Department, resulting in a Letter of Impending Enforcement Action warning the school it risks losing federal funding.

The other side of the argument

Critics, including some pro-Palestinian and Jewish advocacy groups cited by Reuters, argue the administration is conflating criticism of Israel's military campaign in Gaza with antisemitism itself, and that labeling pro-Palestinian advocacy as support for extremism chills legitimate campus speech. Protest against a foreign government's policies is not automatically bigotry against a religious or ethnic group, and OCR's case will need to show actual discriminatory conduct, not just controversial rallies, to hold up under Title VI.

At the same time, physical attacks, break-in attempts, and graffiti targeting students because they're Jewish are not protected speech under any standard. The complaints describe both categories, and untangling which allegations are protest activity versus targeted harassment is exactly what OCR's investigation is supposed to sort out.

Neither university has been found liable for anything yet. The investigations are open-ended, and San Jose State's specific denial of the quote attributed to its former administrator remains unresolved. Whether OCR corrects, defends, or drops that detail will be an early test of how carefully the department vetted its own case before going public with it.