Penn asks court for stay of judge’s order that it release list of Jewish people on its campus
The Ivy League school also intends to file an appeal of the order
The University of Pennsylvania has asked an appeals court for a stay of a judge’s order that requires it to release lists of people affiliated with Jewish organizations on its campus to the Trump administration.
Penn argued in court documents filed Monday that it would be “irreparably harmed” if it had to comply with the order, handed down late last month, before the school has a chance to appeal.
Penn filed formal notice Monday that it intends to appeal the decision by U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, who ordered the university to comply with a subpoena from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
The ruling marked a major loss for Penn in its fight to keep employees’ and students’ personal information from the federal government as the EEOC sought to investigate antisemitism, which has been a priority for the Trump administration — especially on college campuses.
“The risk that Penn would be compelled to provide disclosures that deprive its employees of their constitutional rights is unquestionably irreparable injury and weighs heavily in favor of permitting full appellate review before any further disclosure in response to the subpoena occurs,” the school said in its filing Monday.
Penn said the charge filed by a Trump-appointed EEOC commissioner of “a hostile work environment” for Jewish people does not meet the requirements of the agency’s regulatory duties.
The EEOC has demanded that Penn create lists of Jewish employees over their objections because no such lists exist, Penn said.
» READ MORE: Penn and Trump administration spar in court over subpoena seeking names of Jewish faculty and students
“This demand is so novel that the EEOC has cited no authority in which a court enforced a subpoena conscripting an employer to identify employees of a specific religion (and Penn is aware of none),” the school said. “Whether the constitution protects against the compelled disclosure of religious information lies at the heart of the privacy claim Penn asserts in defense of the subpoena, and it is not a question squarely addressed by the Court’s decision.”
In a 32-page ruling, Pappert largely dismissed arguments from Penn and others who intervened on the school’s behalf that releasing the information sought by the commission would put employees at risk, create an undue burden on the school, and cause employees to disaffiliate from such groups.
Pappert ruled the school had to provide the information to the EEOC, though it does not have to state which particular organization each person is affiliated with.
» READ MORE: Jewish students and faculty at Penn ask that their names not be turned over in federal antisemitism investigation
The EEOC has not commented on the ruling other than to refer a reporter to the judge’s opinion.
The EEOC filed suit against Penn in November after the Ivy League university refused to comply with its subpoena seeking information for an antisemitism investigation it began in 2023 over the school’s treatment of Jewish faculty and other employees.
In its quest to find people potentially affected by antisemitism concerns at Penn, the commission demanded a list of employees in Penn’s Jewish Studies Program, a list of all clubs, groups, organizations, and recreation groups related to the Jewish religion — including points of contact and a roster of members — and names of employees who lodged antisemitism complaints.
The original complaint was launched by EEOC Commissioner Andrea Lucas, now chair of the body, on Dec. 8, 2023, two months after Hamas’ attack on Israel that led to unrest on college campuses, including Penn, and charges of antisemitism. It was also just three days after Penn’s then-president, Liz Magill, had testified before a Republican-led congressional committee on the school’s handling of antisemitism complaints; the testimony drew a bipartisan backlash and led to Magill’s resignation days later.
Pappert said the commission had the right to pursue an investigation that way, despite objections from Penn.
In its request for a stay, Penn argued that employees could file a complaint or contact the EEOC with allegations of antisemitism in the interim — and that they are certainly aware of the EEOC’s desire to hear from them.
“With all of the publicity and campus furor about this subpoena, the EEOC’s desire to hear from employees about any workplace antisemitism is known to all,” Penn wrote.
