Higher Education - Year in Review for 2024

A. Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) Entered into Agreements with the Department of Education to Resolve Allegations of Shared-Ancestry Discrimination, in Violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Antisemitism, anti-Arab, and anti-Muslim harassment and violence¹ have all been on the rise on college campuses.² After Hamas' October 7, 2023 attacks on Israel and Israel's military response in Gaza, the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) opened and conducted dozens of investigations of colleges and universities under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Many colleges and universities are still under investigation over institutions' alleged shortcomings in responding to complaints alleging antisemitic, anti-Palestinian, or anti-Muslim incidents on college campuses and online.³

OCR completed many investigations and reached resolutions with several colleges and universities in 2024 to ensure compliance with Title VI, including:

1. Brown University – OCR investigated incidents such as the use of slurs, harassment, and harmful conduct between students during protests.⁴ OCR noted that Brown took proactive steps to support a nondiscriminatory campus environment, including updating its policies and procedures, providing training that addressed shared ancestry discrimination, and providing workshops on combating antisemitism and anti-Muslim hate.⁵ However, OCR found that the university did not take needed steps in response to the 75 reports of alleged harassment.⁶ Under the resolution agreement, Brown is required to further revise its policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Title VI; conduct annual training for all students and employees; maintain records related to complaints or reports of discrimination under Title VI; conduct a review of the university’s response to complaints and reports of discrimination during the 2023–24 and 2024–25 academic years; and conduct climate surveys and analyses.⁷
2. Drexel University – OCR received complaints alleging antisemitic discrimination related to someone setting fire to a dormitory door of a suite where a Jewish student lived.⁸ OCR confirmed that the specific incident did not involve antisemitic conduct and the university's response to the incident did not raise concerns.⁹ However, OCR found that Drexel failed to fulfill its obligations to assess whether the reported incidents of shared ancestry discrimination and harassment created a hostile environment.¹⁰ Under the resolution agreement, Drexel is required to review and revise its policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Title VI; continue providing investigator trainings; provide training to all faculty, staff, and students addressing discrimination; provide OCR with documentation of the university's spring 2024 and winter 2025 climate survey and the university's analysis; review the university's response to each report of discrimination and/or harassment it received on the basis of shared ancestry during the 2022–23 and 2023–24 school years; and provide OCR with information regarding its investigations of reports of alleged discrimination, including harassment, on the basis of shared ancestry for the 2024–25 and 2025–26 academic years.¹¹
3. Lafayette College – OCR investigated Lafayette's responses to an October 2023 protest on campus and notices of antisemitic and anti-Arab discrimination.¹² OCR found that the college took steps to respond proactively to prevent the creation of a hostile environment, but nonetheless fell short of its obligations.¹³ Specifically, it found that the college did not respond consistently to conduct that was off-campus or online.¹⁴ Under the resolution agreement, Lafayette is required to review its policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Title VI; provide investigator training; provide training to staff and students addressing discrimination; review the college's response to each report of discrimination and/or harassment it received on the basis of shared ancestry during the 2023–24 school year; and provide OCR with information regarding its investigations of reports of alleged discrimination for the 2024–25 and 2025–26 academic years.¹⁵
4. Muhlenberg College – After receiving a complaint alleging antisemitic conduct at Muhlenberg College, OCR investigated a professor's classroom statements and social media posts that were alleged to have created a potential hostile environment for Jewish students.¹⁶ While Muhlenberg took many important steps to fulfill its obligations under Title VI, OCR found that the college did not effectively consider or comply with Title VI's obligation "to ensure that a hostile environment based on national origin does not exist or persist in its education program."¹⁷ OCR noted that "harassing conduct need not target a particular person in order to create a hostile environment for a student or group of students in a school program or activity." Under the resolution agreement, Muhlenberg is required to provide annual investigator trainings; conduct climate assessments; provide OCR with documentation sufficient to show that the college has completed an investigation into whether actions by the professor created a hostile environment for Jewish students on campus; review the college's response to reports of discrimination and/or harassment on the basis of shared ancestry; and provide OCR with information regarding its investigations of reports of alleged discrimination for the 2024–25 and 2025–26 academic years.
5. Temple University – OCR reviewed complaints regarding vandalism and graffiti, posts on social media, and incidents at on-campus protests.¹⁸ OCR's investigation found that despite Temple's many proactive steps to support an inclusive and nondiscriminatory campus environment, the university appears not to have met its obligations due to its failure to assess whether the incidents created a hostile environment.¹⁹ Under the resolution agreement, the university is required to implement annual investigator trainings and staff and student trainings; conduct climate assessments; and review its response to each report of discrimination and/or harassment on the basis of shared ancestry for the 2022–23 and 2023–24 school years.²⁰
6. Five Campuses in the University of California System – OCR investigated complaints filed against University of California campuses in Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Davis, and Santa Cruz.²¹ OCR investigated alleged harassment and violence against students of Jewish, Israeli, Palestinian, Muslim, and/or Arab ancestry.²² Under the resolution agreement, these universities are required to provide OCR with any proposed revisions to their policies and procedures for review and approval; provide annual investigator training; provide annual trainings to public safety and campus police officers; conduct an audit of the schools’ responses to reports and complaints for academic years 2023–24 and 2024–25 at each campus named in the complaint; conduct climate assessments and analysis; issue a statement to all students and staff; and agree to OCR monitoring until the terms of the agreement are met.²³ Additionally, the universities agreed to conduct investigations and take any necessary remedial actions with respect to any claims that have not yet been addressed.²⁴
7. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign – OCR investigated anti-Jewish, anti-Muslim, anti-Palestinian, and anti-Arab incidents after receiving complaints against the university alleging antisemitic discrimination.²⁵ Incidents included assault, dissemination of antisemitic flyers on campus, throwing a rock at an event in the Hillel Center, and alleged antisemitism online.²⁶ OCR found that the university was unable to address the hostile environment on its campus.²⁷ Under the resolution agreement, the university is required to review and revise its nondiscrimination policies and procedures to ensure consistent compliance with Title VI; review and revise its protest and demonstration policy to ensure university law enforcement responses related to protests and demonstrations are applied equitably; provide investigator training; conduct annual training for faculty, staff, and students; conduct a review of the university’s response to complaints and reports of antisemitic and other shared ancestry discrimination during the 2023–24 academic year; provide OCR with information regarding any complaints alleging discrimination during the 2024–25 school year; and administer a climate survey and analysis.²⁸
8. University of Michigan – OCR's investigation found that Michigan did not take required steps to address whether incidents such as the use of derogatory slurs during protests and online harassment created a hostile environment for students, faculty, or staff.²⁹ OCR further found that the university's policies were unclear as to how it would respond to alleged discrimination.³⁰ Under the resolution agreement, the university is required to review and revise its policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Title VI; provide annual training for students and staff; conduct climate assessments; review its responses to complaints received during the 2023–24 school year; and agree to OCR monitoring.³¹

These investigations will likely continue under the Trump administration, with OCR continuing to focus on investigating antisemitic conduct pursuant to the President's Executive Order, "Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism."³²On February 3, 2025, the Department of Education put "universities, colleges, and K-12 schools on notice: the Trump administration will not tolerate continued institutional indifference to the wellbeing of Jewish students on American campuses."³³ And in late February 2025, the Administration announced the creation of a federal task force that will visit ten college campuses that have experienced antisemitic incidents.³⁴ Given these developments, investigations into antisemitism will likely remain an active investigative priority in 2025. OCR's 2024 resolutions, discussed above, can provide helpful insight into the steps that colleges and universities can take to ensure that they are complying with the legal requirements to provide a learning environment free from hostility toward students based on shared ancestry.

B. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972

1. US Department of Education Imposes $14 Million Fine on Liberty University for Clery Act Violations

The DOE's Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) conducted a review of Liberty University's compliance with the Clery Act following receipt of several complaints. The final report, which was released on March 5, 2024, cited eleven findings in total. In sum, the FSA found that between 2016 and 2023, Liberty University failed to implement an adequate program to comply with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (the "Clery Act"), including a failure to keep accurate crime statistics in its reporting, to support victims, and to issue timely warnings. Enacted in 1990 after the tragic murder of college student Jeanne Clery, the Clery Act is a federal statute requiring colleges and universities participating in federal financial aid programs to maintain and disclose campus crime statistics and security information.³⁵

On March 5, 2024, the DOE announced that its FSA office was imposing a $14 million fine as part of its settlement agreement with Liberty University for the Clery Act violations.³⁶ This is the largest fine ever imposed for violating the Clery Act. Liberty agreed to spend $2 million over the next two years for on-campus safety improvements and compliance enhancements. The settlement agreement also requires Liberty to bring its programs and operations into compliance with the Clery Act in a manner that will provide reasonable assurance that these violations will not recur. In its announcement, the DOE recognized the university administration’s prompt acknowledgment of nearly all violations identified in the DOE's initial report and its demonstrated commitment to remedying them.

The Liberty case is a reminder about the importance of compliance with the Clery Act, a law that while rarely enforced, can result in steep fines and significant reputational harm when it is. Colleges and universities should ensure that they have designated appropriate offices to handle Clery Act compliance and have provided necessary employee training and support.

2. Department of Justice and the University of Maryland, Baltimore County Agree to a $4.14 Million Settlement for Student-Athletes to Remedy Title IX Violations 

In March 2024, the Department of Justice announced the results of its investigation into the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), which it launched after receiving allegations that a former head swimming and diving coach sexually abused and discriminated against student-athletes in violation of Title IX.³⁷

DOJ's investigation found, in part, that from as early as 2015 and continuing through 2020, UMBC was on notice of and failed to respond adequately to allegations that the former head coach filmed students while showering and sexually touched male student-athletes on the pool deck, in the locker room, and in the bathroom of the university's aquatic center.³⁸ DOJ also found that, from 2016 through 2020, the Athletics Department failed to report several incidents of dating violence by male student-athletes against female teammates on the swim team.³⁹ Athletics staff and male swimming and diving teammates also made degrading comments about female teammates' bodies, and the head coach asked invasive questions about his swimmers’ sexual relationships.⁴⁰

UMBC cooperated fully with the investigation and agreed to pay up to $4.14 million in financial relief to student-athletes who were subjected to sexual harassment by the former head coach.⁴¹ UMBC has also agreed to: improve its process for responding to complaints of sex discrimination, provide additional resources and staffing for its Title IX compliance program, provide a full-time support person for those who have experienced sexual assault, provide training to student-athletes and athletics department employees, create and enforce a policy outlining expectations for coaching staff behavior, and administer surveys to student-athletes about their experiences with sex discrimination and take all necessary and appropriate corrective action.⁴² DOJ will monitor the implementation of the agreement terms until the 2028–29 academic school year.⁴³

This resolution serves as a reminder to colleges and universities to ensure their policies and procedures facilitate compliance with Title IX. In particular, the policies should reflect the appropriate steps to promptly and appropriately investigate allegations of misconduct, and should ensure that those steps are rigorously followed and documented.

3. Hinds Community College in Mississippi Entered into a Resolution Agreement to Address a Student's Pregnancy Discrimination Complaint

OCR opened an investigation into allegations that Hinds Community College in Mississippi failed to provide a pregnant student with necessary academic adjustments and services during and after her pregnancy.⁴⁴ OCR found that the college had no process in place to respond to the student’s requests, nor did the college recognize pregnancy and related conditions as Title IX matters.⁴⁵ The college violated Title IX in its response to the student's complaints of discrimination and harassment and did not consider whether the student’s pregnancy complications constituted a temporary disability.⁴⁶

The college agreed to take specific actions to resolve the investigation. Those commitments include revising its Title IX policies and procedures, publishing information on its website for pregnant students, and providing training for school staff regarding Title IX requests.⁴⁷

C. Pennsylvania State University Agrees to Pay $1.25 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations Relating to Non-Compliance with Contractual Cybersecurity Requirements 

Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) agreed to pay $1.25 million to resolve allegations of violating the False Claims Act (FCA).⁴⁸ The allegations against Penn State pertain to non-compliance with cybersecurity requirements in contracts or subcontracts with the Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.⁴⁹

Between 2018 and 2023, Penn State allegedly failed to implement required cybersecurity controls and did not adequately develop and implement plans to correct identified deficiencies.⁵⁰ The university submitted cybersecurity assessment scores to the DoD that misrepresented the implementation dates of certain controls and did not pursue plans of action to address these issues.⁵¹ Additionally, Penn State did not use an external cloud service provider that met DoD’s security requirements for covered defense information.⁵²

The settlement between the Department of Justice and Penn State resolves a lawsuit filed under the whistleblower provisions of the FCA.⁵³ The FCA is a federal statute that provides that any person who knowingly submits, or causes to submit, false claims to the government is liable for three times the government’s damages plus a penalty that is linked to inflation. The whistleblower, Matthew Decker, a former chief information officer for Penn State's Applied Research Laboratory, will receive $250,000 from the settlement.⁵⁴ Notably, the claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.⁵⁵

¹ E.g., Press Release, Office of Communications and Outreach, Department of Education, U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights Announces Resolution of a Complaint Against the University of Illinois – Urbana Champaign (Sept. 3, 2024), https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-educations-office-civil-rights-announces-resolution-of-0.

² Lexi Lonas Cochran, Fears Rise on Campuses After Attack on Palestinian College Students, The Hill (Nov. 30, 2023); Holly Honderich, Antisemitic Incidents in US Surge to Record High – Report, BBC (Oct. 6, 2024), https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9wkxv9d99vo.

³ Zach Montague, Campus Protest Investigations Hang Over Schools as New Academic Year Begins, New York Times (Oct. 5, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/05/us/politics/college-campus-protests-investigations.html?searchResult Position=6.

⁴ Letter from Department of Education to Brown University (July 8, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/01242116-a.pdf.

⁵ Id.

⁶ Id.

⁷ Id. at 15.

⁸ Letter from Department of Education to Drexel University (Aug. 2, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/03242062-a.pdf.

⁹ Id. at 20.

¹⁰ Id. at 21–22.

¹¹ Id. at 22–23.

¹² Letter from Department of Education to Lafayette College (June 21, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/03242029-a.pdf.

¹³ Id.

¹⁴ Id.

¹⁵ Id. at 13–14.

¹⁶ Letter from Department of Education to Muhlenberg College (Sept. 30, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/03242071-a.pdf.

¹⁷ Id. at 16–19.

¹⁸ Letter from Department of Education to Temple University (Dec. 2, 2024) https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/03242103-a.pdf.

¹⁹ Id. at 16.

²⁰ Resolution Agreement (Nov. 24, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/03242103-b.pdf.

²¹ Letter from Department of Education to University of California (Dec. 20, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/09222257-a.pdf.

²² Id.

²³ Resolution Agreement (Dec. 12, 2018), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/09222257-b.pdf.

²⁴ Id.

²⁵ Letter from Department of Education to University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (Sept. 3, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/05202325-a.pdf.

²⁶ Id.

²⁷ Id. at 19–20.

²⁸ Id.

²⁹ University of Michigan Resolution Agreement (June 14, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/15242066-b.pdf.

³⁰ Id.

³¹ Id.

³² Exec. Order No. 14188, 90 Fed. Reg. 8847 (Feb. 3, 2025), https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/additional-measures-to-combat-anti-semitism.

³³ Oress Release, Office of Communications and Outreach, Department of Education, U.S. Department of Education Probes Cases of Antisemitism at Five Universities (Feb. 3, 2025), https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-probes-cases-of-antisemitism-five-universities.

³⁴ Bianca Quilantan, Federal antisemitism task force announces visits to 10 college campuses, PoliticoPro (Feb. 28, 2025), https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2025/02/federal-antisemitism-task-force-announces-visits-to-10-college-campuses-00206711.

³⁵ Clery Act Reports, Federal Student Aid, https://studentaid.gov/data-center/school/clery-act-reports. The Department of Education calculates Clery Act fines based on factors including the severity of the infraction(s) and the size of the institution. In 2024, the maximum fine an institution could receive under the Clery Act was $69,733 per violation.

³⁶ Press Release, Office of Communications and Outreach, Department of Education, U.S. Department of Education Probes Cases of Antisemitism at Five Universities, https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-imposes-14-million-fine-against-liberty-universityclery-act-violations.

³⁷ Press Release, Department of Justice, Justice Department Finds University Failed to Address Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Student Athletes in Maryland (Mar. 18, 2024), https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-finds-university-failed-address-allegations-sexual-abuse-student-athletes.

³⁸ Id.

³⁹ Id.

⁴⁰ Id.

⁴¹ Press Release, Department of Justice, Justice Department Secures $4.14 Million Settlement for Student-Athletes to Remedy Title IX Violations at University of Maryland, Baltimore County (Apr. 3, 2024), https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-secures-414-million-settlement-student-athletes-remedy-title-ix.

⁴² Id.

⁴³ Id.

⁴⁴ Letter from Department of Education to Hinds Community College (Apr. 11, 2024), https://ocrcas.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ocr-letters-and-agreements/06212198-a.pdf.

⁴⁵ Id.

⁴⁶ Id. at 5.

⁴⁷ Id. at 14–15.

⁴⁸ Press Release, Office of Communications and Outreach, Department of Education, The Pennsylvania State University Agrees to Pay $1.25M to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations Relating to Non-Compliance with Contractual Cybersecurity Requirements (Oct. 22, 2024), https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/pennsylvania-state-university-agrees-pay-125m-resolve-false-claims-act-allegations-relating.

⁴⁹ Id.

⁵⁰ Id.

⁵¹ Id.

⁵² Id.

⁵³ Id.

⁵⁴ Id.

⁵⁵ Id.

The most prominent education-related internal investigations in 2024 were related to the protests over the Israel-Hamas conflict. Other internal investigations encompassed a broad range of issues, including traditional areas such as discrimination, academic fraud, and misconduct.

A. Protests over the Israel-Hamas Conflict

Universities and colleges' responses to the on-campus protests relating to the Israel-Hamas conflict (the "Protests") illustrate the challenges that institutions face in balancing freedom of expression with campus safety and inclusivity—while also navigating a complicated, high-profile, and divisive topic. Institutions' responses provide a few useful lessons.

1. Columbia University, a prominent hotbed for the Protests, conducted several internal investigations. One investigation concerned Katherine Franke, a pro-Palestine law professor who gave an interview criticizing students who had served in the Israel Defense Forces, alleging that they harmed other students at Columbia.¹ Professor Franke also allegedly retaliated against a complainant by providing that person's identity to a reporter and reposting a tweet directing slurs at the complainant.² Professor Franke's actions made national news, and the president of Columbia was asked about the investigation during a congressional hearing.³ Columbia University's investigation concluded that Professor Franke's comments and actions violated university policy.⁴ Professor Franke and Columbia reached a departure agreement, which she referred to as a "termination" and Columbia called a "retirement."⁵
2. In a different incident, following an investigation, Columbia barred a pro-Israel professor, Shai Davidai, from visiting campus.⁶ Columbia suspended him because he "repeatedly harassed and intimidated University employees in violation of University policy."⁷ Professor Davidai's actions included accusing student groups of supporting terrorism, calling a Columbia scholar a "spokesperson for Hamas," and posting videos of his intense questioning of Columbia's chief operating officer.⁸
3. On May 15, 2024, the University of Tennessee (UT) Police Department arrested eleven individuals during a protest over the Israel-Hamas conflict on campus. One arrestee, a member of the Board of Visitors for the UT Department of Religious Studies, filed a complaint alleging that he was physically harmed.⁹ UT investigated the details surrounding the arrest and concluded that there was no evidence of policy or conduct violations.¹⁰
4. On October 24, 2024, Brown University temporarily suspended the campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine and initiated an investigation into the group's conduct at a protest in October 2024.¹¹ Brown did so because of "the severity of alleged threatening, intimidating and harassing actions during an event," which included "banging on a vehicle," "screaming profanities at individuals," and using a racial slur. Brown's investigation, which is ongoing, will review the behavior of both the student groups as a whole and the individual protestors.

The examples above demonstrate a few key points. First, as seen at Columbia University, faculty were and continue to be divided over the Protests. Transparency, communications, and consistency in applying standards and policies are critical in such situations to avoid aggravating tensions. Second, the Protests affected a wide variety of groups, including professors, students, student organizations, support staff, and campus police departments. As such, institutions' responses to protest should consider the needs of all stakeholders. Third, investigations should be properly tailored. As Brown University did, sometimes investigations should be conducted into individuals and organizations, not just one or the other. Fourth, even though a pre-planned response to a protest may be reasonable in the moment (and it is best practice to have a plan ahead of time), the best outcome will likely be reached through collaboration, communication, and a willingness to deviate from a response plan if circumstances dictate doing so.

B. Other Noteworthy Investigations

1. One notable probe concerning research misconduct and academic dishonesty involved physics professor Ranga Dias, formerly employed at the University of Rochester.¹² The university's investigation determined that Professor Dias, who achieved public notoriety for his superconductor research, engaged in unethical behavior by misrepresenting data.¹³ At least five papers he helped author have been retracted.¹⁴ This is just one example of research misconduct, which is a significant issue that does not feature prominently in this Year in Review, but is often in the headlines. For example, allegations related to research misconduct and plagiarism led to the resignations of Stanford's president in 2023 and Harvard's in 2024.¹⁵
2. As we discussed in a previous newsletter, Florida A&M University investigated a publicly-accepted $238 million stock donation after discovering that the gift was fraudulent and the price valuation was "baseless." The investigation concluded that the rushed, secretive gift review process led to university officials ignoring several red flags and failing to conduct an independent price valuation.
3. The University of Georgia (UGA) investigated an employee who allowed a neo-Nazi event to occur on his property.¹⁶ UGA concluded that as a state university, it "cannot discipline employees for personal, off-campus expressive activity, no matter how offensive or repugnant those activities may be."¹⁷ The employee was allowed to return to work, although he was warned that views "expressed in the workplace" could violate university policy.¹⁸
4. After receiving multiple complaints, Rutgers University conducted an investigation into its women's gymnastics program, ultimately placing the coach on leave.¹⁹ Rutgers determined that the coach had an inappropriate relationship with the former Rutgers athletic director, who stepped down shortly after he was notified about the impending investigation.²⁰ The investigators also found that the coach "presided over a divided and dysfunctional organization."²¹ Many of the athletes alleged that she was "dismissive" of injured players, did not appropriately handle mental health problems, and pushed players who had fallen out of her favor to medically retire.²²
5. Finally, Notre Dame University suspended its entire men’s swimming program for “at least” one academic year because of a widespread, "deeply embedded team culture" that included extensive violations of the NCAA rules prohibiting gambling on athletic competitions, including intercollegiate swimming.²³ Only a "small number" of team members did not participate in the gambling activities.²⁴ Notre Dame explained that "while individual conduct varied, the overwhelming cultural dynamic on the team necessitates a full suspension."²⁵ Notre Dame recently announced that it has corrected the issues, and the swimming program will resume competition in the 2025–26 season.²⁶ Gambling-related problems are not going away, and colleges and universities should take measures to prevent potential issues, many of which we discussed in a previous newsletter and on Law360.

C. Conclusion

All told, 2024 witnessed a series of significant investigations across IHEs, highlighting a range of important issues within higher education. Institutions grappled with the complexities of permitting free expression regarding the Israel-Hamas conflict and the fallout of research misconduct and fraudulent donor gifts. Various policy violations by coaches and athletes further underscored the need for stringent oversight and accountability in university sports. These investigations collectively underscore the ongoing challenges that institutions of higher education face in maintaining compliance with internal policies and legal standards to ensure a safe, fair, and honest academic environment.

¹ Ryan Quinn, Pro-Palestinian Columbia Professor Departs After Investigation, Inside Higher Ed (Jan. 10, 2025), https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/academic-freedom/2025/01/10/pro-palestine-columbia-professor-departs-after.

² Id.

³ Id.

⁴Id.

⁵Id.

⁶ Vimal Patel and Sharon Otterman, Columbia Bars Vocal Pro-Israel Professor From Campus, N.Y. TIMES (Oct. 16, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/16/us/columbia-professor-shai-davidai-banned.html

⁷ Rebecca Massel, Columbia suspends Shai Davidai's campus access after he allegedly 'harassed and intimidated'University employees, Columbia Spectator (Oct. 15, 2024), https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2024/10/16/columbia-suspends-shai-davidais-campus-access-after-he-allegedly-harassed-and-intimidated-university-employees/.

⁸ Id.

⁹ Camruinn Morgan-Rumsey, UT police launches internal investigation after Yassin Terou files complaint about arrest, WVLT8 (May 21, 2024), https://www.wvlt.tv/2024/05/21/ut-police-launches-internal-investigation-after-yassin-terou-files-complaint-about-arrest/; Daniel Dassow, University of Tennessee police close investigation into Yassin Terou’s arrest, knox news (Jun. 11, 2024), https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/local/2024/06/11/university-of-tennessee-police-department-close-yassin-terrou-arrest-investigation/74061868007/.

¹⁰ Daniel Dassow, University of Tennessee police close investigation into Yassin Terou's arrest, knox news (Jun. 11, 2024).

¹¹ Sophia Wotman and Sam Levine, Brown University suspends Students for Justice in Palestine pending investigation, The Brown Daily Herald (Oct. 27, 2024), https://www.browndailyherald.com/article/2024/10/brown-university-suspends-students-for-justice-in-palestine-pending-investigation.

¹² Nidhi Subbaraman, Embattled Superconductivity Scientist Is Out, Wall St. J. (Nov. 19, 2024), https://www.wsj.com/science/university-rochester-ranga-dias-superconductor-misconduct-61288727.

¹³Id.

¹⁴ Id.

¹⁵ https://www.npr.org/2023/07/19/1188828810/stanford-university-president-resigns; https://apnews.com/article/harvard-president-claudine-gay-resigns-841575b89bcdc062cdf979e647a2539e; see also Research Misconduct, University of Kentucky (compiling articles related to research misconduct), https://www.research.uky.edu/research-misconduct/research-misconduct-news.

¹⁶ Wayne Ford, UGA Investigation Clears Employee Whose Property Was Used for Neo-Nazi Festival in 2024, Athens Banner-Herald (Jan. 9, 2025), https://www.onlineathens.com/story/news/local/2025/01/09/uga-investigation-clears-employee-who-property-held-neo-nazi-festival/77579679007/.

¹⁷ Id.

¹⁸ Id.

¹⁹ Associated Press, Rutgers Places Gymnastics Coach Umme Salim-Beasley on Leave, ESPN (Jan. 18, 2025), https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/43468041/rutgers-places-gymnastics-coach-umme-salim-beasley-leave.

²⁰ Id.

²¹ Id.

²² Id.

²³ Press Release, Pete Bevacqua, University of Notre Dame Vice President and James E. Rohr Director of Athletics, Men’s Swimming Program Suspended for a Minimum of One Academic Year (Aug. 15, 2024), https://fightingirish.com/mens-swimming-program-suspended-for-a-minimum-of-one-academic-year/.

²⁴ Id.

²⁵ Id.

²⁶ Chris Vanini, Notre Dame Reinstates Men’s Swimming Team After 1-year Suspension for Internal Gambling Violations, The Athletic (Feb. 26, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6162764/2025/02/26/notre-dame-swimming-suspension-lifted/.

A. Title IX

1. Challenge to Scope of Title IX

In April 2024, the Biden administration amended Title IX to provide greater protections to LGBT individuals. Notably, across eight cases, twenty-six states challenged the administration's "rewrite" of Title IX.¹ These complaints broadly alleged that the administration violated the Administrative Procedures Act, and that the interpretation that Title IX protects individuals from discrimination against gender and sexual identities was, itself, an unconstitutional or overtly-political use of executive authority. In each of the eight cases, courts ordered injunctions against the application of the Rule. 

On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titled "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government." In that Order, the President ordered that "sex" be defined as biological sex, that federal Agencies eliminate the use of "gender" and "gender identity" on official forms and communications, and that Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) not be interpreted to extend to federal agency action or Title IX. In a second executive order issued on February 5, 2025, the administration went further, interpreting Title IX as prohibiting transgender women from participating in women’s sports. President Trump also rescinded Executive Orders and Agency guidance "inconsistent with the requirements" of the Order. 

2. Title IX Litigation

In Poe v. Lowe, Poe, a male student, sued Vanderbilt University.² Vanderbilt disciplined Poe for spreading rumors about alleged sexual misconduct by another student, Roe. Roe’s family filed complaints against Poe and two female students for spreading these rumors online; however, Vanderbilt only investigated and charged Poe. Poe invoked Title IX to challenge the University's "selective enforcement" on gender lines. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee allowed Poe to pursue his Title IX, contract, and other claims against the University. The Court reasoned that Poe made the necessary showing of selective enforcement by showing "Vanderbilt chose not to do anything with any female posters," but did investigate Poe. The case is set for trial in June 2026.

B. Antitrust

Antitrust law continued to play an outsized role in 2024 legal developments. Many of the most notable antitrust developments revolved around the NCAA, whose structure and regulations are being judicially reshaped. For example, the House v. NCAA settlement was preliminarily approved by the court.³ Under the current agreement, former college athletes would share $2.78 billion in damages to compensate for lost name, image, and likeness (NIL) opportunities.⁴ The agreement would also allow colleges and universities to begin revenue-sharing with athletes.⁵ The NCAA would also gain additional power to enforce NIL rules that prohibit "pay-for-play" agreements.⁶

These are not the only changes. The NCAA agreed to scrap its requirement that athletes who transfer sit out from playing the following year.⁷ The NCAA also granted an additional year of eligibility for athletes who had played at the junior college (JUCO) level in response to a federal court’s issuance of a preliminary injunction for noted Vanderbilt quarterback and former JUCO player Diego Pavia.8 A federal judge also issued a preliminary injunction that allows athletes and NIL collectives to negotiate NIL deals during the recruiting and transfer process, a practice that the NCAA had unsuccessfully tried to prohibit.⁹ The NCAA revised its rules to allow former professional players from the Canadian Hockey League to play collegiate hockey.¹⁰However, the question of whether college athletes are employees, raised by Dartmouth College men's basketball players in their petition to unionize to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), will not be decided in the near future, as the players requested on December 31, 2024 that their petition be withdrawn, citing a strategic decision to preserve the precedent set by the regional NLRB ruling classifying them as employees, rather than risk an unfavorable reversal.¹¹

Antitrust challenges in 2024 were not limited to the NCAA. In October 2024, a suit alleging price-fixing was brought against 40 prominent universities.¹² The plaintiffs claimed that the universities conspired to raise the cost of attendance by agreeing to include the financial information of non-custodial parents in their financial calculations.¹³This, in essence, meant that students were required to list assets of parents with no obligation or interest in funding their college education, which misrepresented the students' true financial needs. A different price-fixing suit against schools who participated in 568 Presidents Group, alleging that their consideration of applicants' future fundraising potential rendered them ineligible for the antitrust exemption allowing them to share financial information with other universities, is still ongoing, although universities continue to settle the claims against them.¹⁴

Academic publishers also faced antitrust challenges in 2024. A group of scientists brought a class action suit against Elsevier, Wolters Kluwer, John Wiley & Sons, Sage Publications, Taylor and Francis, and Springer Nature, alleging that the publishers conspired to violate antitrust law by (1) not compensating peer reviewers; (2) limiting scholars to submitting their manuscripts to one academic journal at a time; and (3) prohibiting scholars from sharing information in those manuscripts while they are under peer review.¹⁵

C. Faculty Issues

1. Harvard's Sexual Harassment Settlement

In 2024, Harvard University settled a lawsuit in which students contended that John Comaroff, an anthropology professor, had engaged in sexual harassment against students.¹⁶ The students brought this suit in 2022, claiming that Comaroff used his power to sexually exploit aspiring scholars. In suing the University, the students alleged that Harvard failed to adequately protect students. The suit also alleged that Comaroff sexually harassed female students both physically and verbally, including unwanted groping and kissing. The plaintiffs contended that Harvard knew Comaroff was the subject of similar complaints prior to hiring him, and failed to take action against Comaroff during his employment with Harvard. The case moved to confidential mediation in 2023, and settled in August 2024, under terms that are not public.

D. First Amendment

1. Student Protests

Student protests formed the heart of campus First Amendment litigation in 2024. For example, in Students for Just. in Palestine at the Univ. of Fla. v. Rodrigues,¹⁷ the University of Florida Chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (hereinafter, "Students for Justice") sued Raymond Rodrigues, the Chancellor of the State University System of Florida. In late October 2023, Rodrigues issued a memorandum to each university president in the State University System calling for the "deactivation" of Students for Justice groups, alleging that these groups were allied with terrorist organizations. Students for Justice sued Rodrigues, arguing that he violated the organization's First Amendment protections against viewpoint-based restrictions on speech and association. The Florida federal court denied Students for Justice's request for preliminary injunction and dismissed the case, finding that the student group lacked standing because it failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of establishing an injury-in-fact. Specifically, the court found that the university had taken no actual steps against Students for Justice beyond issuing the memorandum itself, and any chilling of speech was at this stage hypothetical. 

2. Vulgarity Issues

In Kimberly Diei v. Randy Boyd, et al.,¹⁸ the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the First Amendment protected a University of Tennessee pharmacy student's personal social media activity. A professionalism committee chair at the university deemed the activity "vulgar." The committee dismissed the student from her program for violating the program's professionalism standards. The court determined that this dismissal "clearly transgressed the school's authority" because the school's "professionalism policies served no pedagogical purpose," and the student’s social media activity "was beyond the purview of her educators' control." Thus, the school could not be shielded by qualified immunity against the claim under the "clearly established" holding in Ward v. Polite, 667 F.3d 727, 732 (6th Cir. 2012), that Diei's speech was protected.

A school's ability to control vulgarity impacting its institution was tested again when a professor's personal online speech caused issues at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. In December 2023, the chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, Joe Gow, was fired over his involvement in the adult entertainment industry.¹⁹ The controversy persisted throughout 2024, and in January 2025, Gow filed a lawsuit seeking reinstatement to his position. Gow alleges that terminating him was unconstitutional, violating his First Amendment free speech rights. His lawsuit is pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.

¹ Libby Stanford, Which States Have Sued to Stop Biden’s Title IX Rule?, Education Week (July 8, 2024), https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/which-states-have-sued-to-stop-bidens-title-ix-rule/2024/07.

² Poe v. Lowe, 756 F. Supp. 3d 357 (M. D. Tenn. Nov. 1, 2024).

³ Justin Williams, House v. NCAA Settlement Granted Preliminary Approval, Bringing New Financial Model Closer, The Athletic (Oct. 7, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5826004/2024/10/07/house-ncaa-settlement-approval-claudia-wilken/.

4 Id.

⁵ Id.

⁶ Id.

⁷ Stewart Mandel, NCAA Agrees to End Transfer Rules Permanently; Athletes who Lost Eligibility Will Have Year Restored, The Athletic (May 30, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5530608/2024/05/30/ncaa-transfer-rules-banned-permanently/.

⁸ Eli Lederman, NCAA grants waiver to ex-JUCO players while appealing Pavia ruling, ABC News (Dec. 24, 2024), https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/ncaa-grants-waiver-juco-players-appealing-pavia-ruling/story?id=117079035; Stewart Mandel and Ralph D. Russo, Vanderbilt QB Diego Pavia Granted Preliminary Injunction, Permitting Him to Compete in 2025, The Athletic (Dec. 18, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6005162/2024/12/18/vanderbilt-qb-diego-pavia-preliminary-injunction/.

⁹ Order Granting Preliminary Injunction, Tennessee v. NCAA, 3:24-CV-00033-DCLC-DCP (D. Tenn. Feb. 23, 2024).

¹⁰ Scott Wheeler, Everything to Know About the NCAA's Decision to Make CHL Players Eligible, The Athletic (Nov. 7, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5828094/2024/11/07/ncaa-canadian-hockey-league-college-hockey-explained/.

¹¹ Michael McCann, Dartmouth Basketball Moves to Drop Unionization Push, Sportico (Dec. 31, 2024), https://www.sportico.com/law/analysis/2024/dartmouth-basketball-withdraws-nlrb-petition-1234822294/.

¹² Lauraann Wood, 40 Private Schools Hit With Aid-Fixing Conspiracy Claims, Law360 (Oct. 8, 2024), https://www.law360.com/articles/1888018/40-private-schools-hit-with-aid-fixing-conspiracy-claims.

¹³ Id.

¹⁴ Press Release, Brown University, Brown University Resolves Financial Aid Antitrust Litigation (Jan. 23, 2024), https://www.brown.edu/news/2024-01-23/agreement. As of December 2024, six schools remain in the litigation: Caltech, Cornell, Georgetown, MIT, Notre Dame, and the University of Pennsylvania. See Susan Svrluga and Danielle Douglas-Gabriel, Students overpaid elite colleges $685 million, 'price-fixing' suit says, Washington Post (Dec. 17, 2024), https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/12/17/georgetown-elite-colleges-financial-aid-price-fixing-lawsuit.

¹⁵ Michael T. Nietzel, Scientists File Antitrust Lawsuit Against Six Journal Publishers, Forbes (Sept. 16, 2024), https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2024/09/16/scientists-file-antitrust-lawsuit-against-six-journal-publishers/.

¹⁶ Jesus Jimenez, Harvard Settles Lawsuit Over Claims of Sexual Harassment by a Professor, New York Times (Aug. 15, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/15/education/harvard-settlement-john-comaroff.html.

¹⁷ Students for Justice in Palestine at the Univ. of Fla. v. Rodrigues, 1:23cv275-MW/MJF (N.D. Fla. Jan. 31, 2024) (order).

¹⁸ 116 F.4th 637 (6th Cir. 2024),

¹⁹ Scott Bauer, Porn-making former University of Wisconsin campus leader argues for keeping his teaching job, AP News (Sept. 20, 2024), https://apnews.com/article/pornography-wisconsin-college-chancellor-gow-2e768fd8dda70f5d8a46ce1110422cf4.

Congressional scrutiny of IHEs continued in 2024, with an increased focus on institutional responses to antisemitism, foreign influence and funding, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Federal funding, foreign student visa programs, and tax benefits also captured significant congressional interest. Due to the increased attention we have already seen in 2025 from the Executive Branch, the media, and members of Congress, postsecondary institutions will likely receive even more congressional scrutiny in the 119th Congress.

A. Institutional Responses to Antisemitism

Following Hamas' attacks on Israel and increased college protests, House Republicans launched a wide-ranging investigation in 2024 into whether postsecondary institutions were meeting their Title VI obligations to protect Jewish students. Beginning in the House Education and Workforce Committee, the investigation expanded in April 2024 to a "House-wide" effort led by the Ways and Means, Education and Workforce, Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Oversight, and Veterans Affairs committees and covered topics ranging from tracing the flow of tax-exempt dollars to the oversight failures of university administrators and leaders.

The investigation involved high-profile hearings, interviews, and subpoenas, which culminated in a 325-page Staff Report published by the House Education and Workforce Committee on October 31, 2024.1 The report found that university administrators made concessions to organizers, chose to withhold support from Jewish students, failed to impose meaningful discipline, and orchestrated negative press on Congressional oversight.

The House of Representatives published an additional report on December 18, 2024, the Staff Report on Antisemitism, in coordination with Speaker Mike Johnson, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, and Majority Whip Tom Emmer. The report included six key findings and eleven recommendations to address rising antisemitism in IHEs. Among other things, the recommendations in the report called for IHEs to impose meaningful discipline against antisemitic harassment and threats and forcefully reject antisemitism, for the Executive Branch to aggressively enforce Title VI and hold universities accountable, and for Congress to pass legislation removing Title VI eligibility from any university that boycotts or divests from Israel. The recommendations in the report were a clear foreshadowing of policy direction in the 119th Congress, which continues under Republican control.

B. Foreign Influence and Funding

Foreign influence and funding were also key issues for congressional Republican oversight in 2024. Chairman John Moolenaar (R-MI) and Chairwoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party led a year-long joint investigation into how US federal research funding has contributed to China’s technological advancements and military modernization. The investigation looked into US-Chinese joint education institutes, including UC Berkeley's partnership with Tsinghua University and the University of Pittsburgh's partnership with Sichuan University, concluding that these institutions serve as conduits for transferring critical US technologies and expertise to China.

In October 2024, Chairman John Moolenaar called on the University of Michigan to close its joint institute with the People's Republic of China's Shanghai Jiao Tong University, claiming Shanghai Jiao Tong University has helped drive China's military modernization and intelligence capabilities, including by contributing to the development of nuclear weapons, carrier rockets, nuclear submarines, and fighter jets.

Republican lawmakers on the House Education and Workforce Committee also raised concerns with the Department of Education's handling of Section 117 investigations. Section 117 of the Higher Education Act requires colleges and universities to disclose gifts and contracts from foreign sources, and its enforcement was a priority during the first Trump administration.

C. DEI Initiatives on College Campuses

DEI initiatives on college campuses were also a focus of congressional scrutiny in 2024, although we expect significantly more scrutiny of DEI programs in 2025, in line with the aggressive approach currently undertaken by the administration. In March 2024, the House Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development held a hearing titled "Divisive, Excessive, Ineffective: The Real Impact of DEI on College Campuses." In his opening statement, Chairman Burgess Owens (R-UT) condemned DEI in the strongest possible terms, stating "instead of becoming a more perfect union, DEI turns our schools, communities, and cities into cesspools of divisiveness and hate."

In August 2024, Bill Cassidy (R-LA), ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, urged the Department of Education Office of Inspector General (OIG) to investigate the use of federal funds by colleges and universities to promote DEI ideology on campus. Cassidy previously penned an op-ed in the Washington Examiner on the influence of DEI in higher education and is also an original cosponsor of the Dismantle DEI Act, which would eliminate all federal DEI programs and funding for federal agencies, contractors, organizations, and educational accreditation agencies that receive federal funding and maintain DEI programs.

Now that Republicans have control over both chambers, we expect to see an increased appetite for investigations into higher education in the House and in the Senate. We can also expect the Executive Branch to become an active partner in these efforts, particularly as the Executive Branch continues to call for banning all DEI programs and abolishing the Department of Education.

¹Republican Staff Rep., Antisemitism on College Campuses Exposed, US House of Rep. Comm. on Educ. & the Workforce (Oct. 31, 2024), available at https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/10.30.24_committee_on_education_and_the_workforce_republican_staff_report_-_antisemitism_on_college_campuses_exposed.pdf.

2024 was a year of significant activity across the higher education landscape, marked by intense scrutiny from all three branches of the federal government and internal investigations within institutions themselves. From the Department of Education's focus on civil rights enforcement and hostile environments under Title VI and Title IX to the Department of Justice's enforcement actions, universities faced considerable pressure to enhance compliance and accountability. Institutions grappled with the necessity of conducting sensitive internal investigations, particularly in response to campus protests, drawing lessons that will undoubtedly inform future responses. The courts, too, played a crucial role, issuing rulings that continue to shape the interpretation of federal statutes like Title IX and defining the boundaries of constitutional rights within the academic setting, while signaling a stricter approach to procedural standing.

Entering 2025 under new administrative leadership, the legal and policy environment for higher education remains dynamic. Far from being resolved, many of the challenges and legal questions that defined 2024 are now confronting institutions anew, shaped by the priorities and directives of the new administration. Navigating this evolving landscape will require continued vigilance and adaptability from IHEs as they work to meet their obligations, uphold their values, and prepare for the legal and political currents ahead.