Students and Civil Rights Groups Sue Columbia over Alleged Violations of Privacy and Free Speech
NEW YORK, NY — A coalition of Columbia University students and civil rights organizations has filed a lawsuit against Columbia University, Barnard College, and the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, alleging violations of student privacy rights and First Amendment protections.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, argues that the university’s cooperation with a Congressional request for student disciplinary records constitutes an unconstitutional suppression of student activism, particularly advocacy for Palestinian human rights.
The plaintiffs, who include eight students at Columbia and Barnard, claim that the university’s willingness to disclose private student records to a federal committee investigating alleged antisemitism on campus sets a dangerous precedent. The lawsuit also contends that Columbia’s compliance with the Congressional demand exposes students to harassment, doxxing, and retaliation for their political views.
On February 13, 2025, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce sent a letter to Columbia University demanding all student or student-worker disciplinary records related to eleven specific campus protests and incidents. The committee suggested that Columbia’s compliance could impact its access to billions in federal funding.
The students and advocacy groups argue that this request is an attempt to intimidate and silence pro-Palestinian activists, particularly in light of previous Congressional hearings that aggressively scrutinized university leaders over their handling of campus protests.
Amy Greer, Esq., an associate at Dratel & Lewis, one of the law firms representing the plaintiffs, warned that Columbia’s cooperation with the Congressional request threatens student rights: “Columbia University’s apparent willingness to comply with the Congressional request to disclose private student records sets a dangerous precedent that undermines academic freedom and student privacy. Our lawsuit seeks to protect the constitutional rights of students who should not be subjected to political intimidation or invasive government overreach. We will continue to fight for the privacy and dignity of all students.”
The lawsuit contends that the House Committee’s actions mirror McCarthy-era tactics, using government pressure to suppress political speech under the pretense of investigating campus antisemitism.
Lamya Agarwala, Esq., Supervising Attorney for CAIR-NY, described the case as part of a broader trend of targeting advocacy for Palestinian rights: “We’re witnessing an escalation of longstanding tactics to suppress speech in support of Palestinian human rights. This case aims to prevent Columbia from turning into an arm of the federal government and do its bidding of suppressing speech it doesn’t like.”
Plaintiffs argue that turning over student records to Congress violates federal privacy laws, particularly the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which prohibits the release of student records without consent. The lawsuit further claims that Columbia’s decision to comply with these demands demonstrates a failure to protect students from retaliation and harassment.
The lawsuit highlights the real-world consequences of disclosing student records, noting that previous Congressional hearings led to doxxing, harassment, and professional repercussions for students and faculty.
Several students claim that their identities were exposed through leaked documents, leading to threats, job losses, and social media harassment. They argue that if Columbia complies with the latest Congressional request, students will be placed in even greater danger.
Gadeir Abbas, Esq., Senior Litigation Attorney at CAIR, underscored the broader implications of the case: “No student should fear that their private information will be handed over to politicians who seek to punish advocacy for Palestinian human rights. This legal action is a necessary step to push back against efforts to silence and surveil students exercising their First Amendment rights.”
The complaint details how students have been targeted online, with conservative media outlets amplifying their names and images, often framing them as supporters of terrorism. One student activist, Mahmoud Khalil, a Syrian-born Palestinian refugee, was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) following his participation in campus protests, prompting allegations that federal authorities are criminalizing political speech.
While Columbia has not publicly stated whether it intends to comply with the Congressional request, the lawsuit alleges that university administrators are preparing to hand over the records. An internal February 27, 2025, email from Columbia’s private counsel at Hecker & Fink, referenced in the complaint, suggests the university is considering compliance despite concerns over student privacy protections.
Columbia and Barnard’s leadership has faced increasing political pressure from the federal government, with President Trump’s administration threatening to withhold federal funding from universities that fail to take strong action against antisemitism. The Department of Education announced in March 2025 that it was reviewing Columbia’s federal contracts and grants, intensifying concerns that the university may comply with the records request to avoid financial repercussions.
The lawsuit warns that by turning over student records, Columbia would effectively be acting as an agent of the federal government, engaging in politically motivated surveillance of its own students.
The legal battle is part of a larger national debate over free speech, student activism, and the role of universities in protecting dissent. The plaintiffs argue that Columbia has a contractual obligation—outlined in its policies on free expression—to uphold academic freedom and protect students from retaliation.
Hamid Bendaas, Communications Director at the IMEU Policy Project, warned that allowing political pressure to dictate university discipline threatens the integrity of higher education: “Targeting student activists under the guise of federal investigations is a blatant attempt to suppress voices advocating for Palestinian rights. It is essential that institutions of higher learning resist external pressures that threaten free expression and academic inquiry.”
The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction to prevent Columbia from disclosing student records. They are also seeking a declaration that the Congressional request violates the First Amendment and a ruling that Columbia’s compliance would violate FERPA and breach student contracts.
Many private Davis institutions are collecting unvetted accusation of what some random person considers hate speach.
Will these institutions turn them into the Trump FBI and ICE to enable deportations. Or Even if all they happens with accusation is an fbi interview that is chilling..
How does this help build trust among Davis neighbors if anyone can turn you in for something they personally think is “off”.
“Many private Davis institutions are collecting unvetted accusation of what some random person considers hate speach.”
What private Davis institutions? What “random person” ? Where did you hear this? I’m not saying this isn’t happening, or that it is happening. I’m saying you can’t just through out vague accusations like that with no specifics and no evidence. You aren’t even being clear what you think is occurring. Are you referring to something that was in the news?
“Will these institutions turn them into the Trump FBI and ICE to enable deportations.”
I have no idea.
“How does this help build trust among Davis neighbors if anyone can turn you in for something they personally think is “off”.”
If you were more specific about who is doing what to whom, I’ll give you my response.
“No student should fear that their private information will be handed over to politicians who seek to punish advocacy for Palestinian human rights.”
If advocacy for Palestinian human rights were the issue, half of UC Davis and half the town of Davis would already have been ‘disappeared’. Blocking people, taking over buildings, and less clear, calling for the death of Jews or support for Hamas is more the issue. Which begs one to wonder why the local Imam remains, been given the cushion in 2017 of the white politician’s apology bed.
Someday, maybe someone can explain to me the reason that Jews are lumped-in with “white” people (in regard to the underlying reason that the incidents you’re referring to don’t cause more outrage), while at the same time, Jews are hated by “actual” white racist groups.
I think I’m going to need some kind of flowchart to figure this out.
“Someday, maybe someone can explain to me the reason that Jews are lumped-in with “white” people (in regard to the underlying reason that the incidents you’re referring to don’t cause more outrage), while at the same time, Jews are hated by “actual” white racist groups.”
That day is today. It’s exactly as F-ing stupid as you state. End of lesson.
Pro-Israel group says it has ‘deportation list’ and has sent ‘thousands’ of names to Trump officials.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/14/israel-betar-deportation-list-trump
From Gaurdian article sited: Betar, which has been labelled an extremist group by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a Jewish advocacy group”
So the group you site is so far-right that the ADL labels them and extremist group? Yeah, Jews are as varied in their political views as Americans, and we have in our family some real nut jobs on the right and on the left, both of which people like to site as if the politics represents ‘Jews’.
What about that guy at the Farmer’s Market with the anti-Jewish tropes? I’m not adding him to the list, and hate speech is free speech — but antisemitism is also about double standards. Would the City allow that booth if he had pictures of minstrals in blackface, had cartoons of exaggeratedly slant-eyed Chinese or talked in the Jose Hemanez accent ? Remember when we were supposed to watch for unconcious microaggressions? These tropes against Jews aren’t even ‘micro’, they are HUGE. Yes, the guy has ‘free speech’ rights, but would the other examples I sited be ‘allowed’ a booth by the City? Would in those instances people just walk by without those inciting outrage? True, many people aren’t as familiar with these tropes, but we are telling y’all they are hugely offensive, not trying to explain some ‘microagression’, and yet . . . and that’s what I mean by the double standard. This subtle aspect of antisemitism is in my view much more destructive than the overt hate.
ADL is kind of a far right group these days, you know?
ADL is rated left center by this fact checker, you know?
“Overall, we rate the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) Left-Center biased based on political positions that mostly favor liberal policy. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information and being a resource for IFCN fact-checkers.”
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/anti-defamation-league/
I don’t agree. If you want I can show you why I disagree. But frankly I’m not inclined to expend the energy only to have you disengage
That’s okay, I’ll go with what the experts say.
Appreciate saving the energy
“ADL is kind of a far right group these days, you know?”
I’m not a huge fan of the ADL, but that’s because they’ve in recent years started to use woke far-left terminology, which I believe to be harmful to the Jewish people’s cause since identity politics, envy politics, the oppressor-oppressed paradigm, and the term colonization have all been weaponized against Jews and Israel.
But you throw out that the ADL is ‘kinda far right’ without any explanation of what you mean by that whatsoever. Which usually means round these Vanguard parts, ‘I’m so correct and my followers (whomever that is) totally know what I’m talking about, so I don’t need to explain, and if you don’t know, well I can’t help you.’ I could see how some could consider *some* of their views ‘right’, but ‘far right’ ?
I can do that, just didn’t want to waste time if Keith was going to disregard
The ADL, historically recognized as a liberal organization dedicated to combating antisemitism and advocating for civil rights, has faced increasing criticism suggesting a shift away from its liberal roots. Critics argue that the ADL’s actions and positions have aligned more closely with conservative agendas, particularly concerning issues related to Israel and definitions of antisemitism.
The ADL has been accused of supporting policies that suppress free speech, especially in the context of criticism against Israel. The organization has been noted to equate antisemitism with criticism of Israel, leading to policies that counter campus antisemitism and silence students supporting Palestine.
In 2020, a coalition of progressive organizations launched the “Drop the ADL” campaign, arguing that “the ADL is not an ally” in social justice work. The campaign consisted of an open letter and a website, shared on social media with the hashtag “#DropTheADL”. Notable signatories included the Democratic Socialists of America, Movement for Black Lives, Jewish Voice for Peace, Center for Constitutional Rights, and Council on American-Islamic Relations. The open letter stated that the ADL “has a history and ongoing pattern of attacking social justice movements led by communities of color, queer people, immigrants, Muslims, Arabs, and other marginalized groups, while aligning itself with police, right-wing leaders, and perpetrators of state violence.”
Internal disagreements within the ADL have also surfaced, particularly regarding its stance on Israel and definitions of antisemitism. In 2024, Yael Eisenstat, head of the ADL’s Center for Technology and Society, resigned, reportedly due to objections over the ADL leadership’s praise of Elon Musk and the organization’s policies targeting pro-Palestine activism rather than focusing solely on antisemitism.
While the ADL continues to present itself as a champion against antisemitism and hate, these criticisms suggest a departure from its traditional liberal stance, aligning more closely with conservative perspectives, particularly concerning Israel and definitions of antisemitism. This perceived shift has led to strained relationships with progressive groups and raised questions about the organization’s current ideological positioning.
Did this response come from an artificial intelligence site? Be honest…
Otherwise what was your source?
I compiled it from my notes on the ADL. Look Keith, I respect that you didn’t want to engage on this issue, and want to rely on your “expert” but there is a huge other side to the story and that’s the ADL has taken a very expansive view on anti-Semitism and a very defensive view of Israeli politics that doesn’t square with the current left. It’s emblematic of the big rift in the Jewish community.
“It’s emblematic of the big rift in the Jewish community.”
oh that’s rich. The politics of Jewish people is all over the map, just like the people of the US. The big difference is that (A) We are united by our Jewish-ness, thus the miracle of Israel despite the political rifts; (B) most people in the US are ‘safe’, whereas in Israel, as my Israeli friend says, ‘you are never sure when you wake up in Israel if this will be your last day on Earth’ She said that like 15 years ago, and I thought it was a bit dramatic, until October 7th, 2023 when I got it. So political views matter a hell of lot more when it’s life and death right in your face everyday
“The organization has been noted to equate antisemitism with criticism of Israel”
I don’t agree with that, and the policies have been mixed, but that not surprisingly considering the complexity, perception and nuances of the issue — but it doesn’t make ADL “far right”.
“Notable signatories included the Democratic Socialists of America, Movement for Black Lives, Jewish Voice for Peace, Center for Constitutional Rights, and Council on American-Islamic Relations.”
I know this list is all you need to confirm what you say, but to those of us who aren’t “far left”, this list is all we need to laugh and move on.
This is really a joke, DG, coming from you. You may remember several years ago when you were using “Grout out the Jews” written on a tile in a Davis Jewish group’s shower as example of how racist Davis was, and the ADL was upset over things of that scale. I said I laughed and thought it was funny, which you seemed upset at (I think it was a ‘micro-agression’ LOL). Anyway, I criticized the ADL for being way too sensitive to really minor sh*t that we should follow Taylor Swift and ‘shake it off’, and that such over-focus on minor sh*t blurs real antisemitism. But now, you are trying to say ADL is ‘far right’. You really just twist with the progressive winds, don’t you?
Things change. Citing a couple of years ago is like citing a different world. Things were changing prior to October 7, but even more since.
Alan – I wonder how much you are actually paying attention: “It’s no secret that as Israel has become a conservative cause in recent years, groups like AIPAC have allied themselves with the right. AIPAC endorsed more than 100 House members who voted against certifying Joe Biden’s election. But the ADL’s turn to the right has so far received little notice.” (This article is from 2023 – I think things have only gotten more pronounced).