By:  Fern Sidman

The University of California, Berkeley, one of the nation’s most prestigious public universities, is facing a high-profile lawsuit alleging that it violated state antidiscrimination laws by rejecting the teaching application of an Israeli scholar on the basis of her nationality. The complaint, filed Wednesday in California Superior Court, has reignited concerns about systemic bias against Israelis and Jews in American academia—concerns that have grown considerably in the wake of the October 7 Hamas massacre in southern Israel.

According to a report that appeared on Wednesday at The Jewish News Syndicate (JNS), the lawsuit was jointly filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and the law firm Olivier & Schreiber PC on behalf of Dr. Yael Nativ, a dance researcher and sociologist who previously served as a visiting professor at Berkeley in 2022. The complaint accuses the university of national origin discrimination, a violation of California’s robust employment protections, and charges that Berkeley’s administrators have failed to remedy the situation even after acknowledging the underlying misconduct.

Dr. Nativ, a respected Israeli scholar, taught a course on intersectional perspectives on contemporary dance in Israel during her previous semester at Berkeley. The class, which was hosted by the university’s theater, dance, and performance studies department in partnership with its Jewish law and Israel studies center, was widely regarded as successful.

As reported by JNS, faculty affiliated with the Jewish law and Israel studies center invited Nativ to apply for a visiting professorship in the department for the 2024–2025 academic year. She submitted her application in August 2023. However, according to the lawsuit, her candidacy was abruptly derailed in the aftermath of Hamas’ October 7 atrocities.

In November 2023, Nativ allegedly received a direct WhatsApp message from the department chair, Professor SanSan Kwan, informing her that her application would not be considered. “Things are very hot here right now, and many of our grad students are angry,” Kwan allegedly wrote, as quoted in the complaint. “I would be putting the department and you in a terrible position if you taught here.”

The message, lawyers argue, revealed plainly discriminatory reasoning: that her nationality, and the political atmosphere surrounding it, disqualified her from teaching.

“This is a plainly illegal act of discrimination,” said Rebecca Harris, a litigation attorney for the Brandeis Center, in comments to JNS. Harris argued that the case exemplifies a broader pattern across elite universities where Israeli and Jewish professors face overt and covert exclusion.

“This lawsuit reflects a broader pattern across top universities where Israeli and Jewish professors and academics have been discriminated against and excluded on that basis,” Harris told JNS, stressing that academic freedom and equal opportunity are being undermined by institutional acquiescence to antisemitic hostility.

According to the complaint, Nativ responded to Kwan’s rejection with a poignant message expressing her deep dismay: “So sad and broken all around, for everyone in all sides. Yet the biggest disappointment and pain come from my/our academic scholars and colleagues, mostly in American universities. The level of ignorance, hate and the inability to make an effort for a complex discourse is astounding and appalling.” Kwan did not respond further.

UC Berkeley, through its communications office, told JNS that it does not comment on “personnel matters” and had not yet reviewed the Brandeis Center’s lawsuit. Dan Mogulof, the university’s assistant vice chancellor for communications, said that while the university cannot address the specific case, it is committed to “confronting harassment and discrimination of all types, and to gaining compliance with all relevant state and federal statutes, and university policies.”

“When those laws and/or policies are violated, the university believes there should be appropriate consequences,” Mogulof told JNS, carefully avoiding any direct reference to Nativ’s claims.

According to the lawsuit, however, Berkeley already conducted its own internal review earlier this year. After Haaretz published a December 31, 2023, op-ed by Nativ criticizing the university’s decision, Berkeley opened an internal investigation in February 2024. That review concluded that “Nativ’s claim that she was discriminated against based on her national origin was substantiated by a preponderance of the evidence.”

Yet, as JNS reported, in the 11 months since that determination, the university has failed to inform Nativ of any remedial actions or plans to rectify the discrimination, prompting the Brandeis Center to escalate the matter in state court.

According to her legal representatives, Dr. Nativ has not pursued financial compensation but has instead sought a restoration of her professional dignity. Harris told JNS that Nativ’s demands were “eminently reasonable,” consisting of an apology, a renewed invitation to return as a visiting professor, and recognition of the violation to ensure safeguards for others in the future.

“All she’s really wanted is an apology, an invitation to return, and recognition of the issue and some kind of remediation to make sure this doesn’t happen to other people,” Harris explained.

The lawsuit was filed in California state court, rather than federal court, because of the state’s particularly strong employment antidiscrimination statutes. “California has robust employment antidiscrimination laws that very explicitly prohibit exactly this type of national origin discrimination in employment, including hiring,” Harris told JNS. “Nativ is looking for the quickest possible resolution of this issue.”

The case against UC Berkeley is the latest flashpoint in an intensifying debate over antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment in American higher education. As JNS has documented, multiple universities have come under scrutiny for failing to protect Jewish students or faculty from harassment, ostracism, and discriminatory treatment.

The allegations against Berkeley are particularly significant, given the school’s reputation as a flagship of the University of California system and a longstanding hub of progressive activism. That such a university could acknowledge discrimination in an internal review, yet fail to take corrective action, will likely fuel broader concerns about the politicization of hiring decisions and the erosion of academic integrity.

For the Brandeis Center, the lawsuit is not only about redress for Nativ but also about setting a precedent. As Harris told JNS, “This is a test of whether top universities will be held accountable under the same laws that govern every other employer in this country.”

The lawsuit filed against UC Berkeley represents more than an individual dispute between an Israeli scholar and an academic department; it crystallizes the growing crisis of antisemitism and anti-Israel bias in higher education. By alleging that Nativ was excluded solely because of her nationality, the case challenges one of America’s leading universities to live up to its stated commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

The stakes are far-reaching. The outcome of the lawsuit could reverberate across academia, determining whether institutions of higher learning can continue to evade accountability for discriminatory acts, or whether state and federal law will compel them to extend to Israeli and Jewish academics the protections they are owed.

For Nativ, the matter remains deeply personal. “The biggest disappointment and pain,” she wrote, “come from my/our academic scholars and colleagues.” Her words reflect not only her individual grievance but also the disillusionment of many who once viewed American universities as bastions of open inquiry and intellectual integrity.

Now, a California courtroom will decide whether those ideals still hold.