Three legal scholars urged a federal appeals court on Oct. 20 to revive civil rights claims made by two Columbia University janitors, who say protesters assaulted them and hurled anti-Jewish slurs during their takeover of Hamilton Hall in April 2024.
The friend-of-the-court brief, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, supports janitors Mariano Torres and Lester Wilson, whose claims the court dismissed initially, because it said that they couldn’t prove that they were victims of discrimination and that the protesters had political motives.
“The suggestion that people can’t be guilty of discrimination if they have political motives is profoundly wrong and, if accepted by the Second Circuit, would imperil civil rights protections for all groups,” Matthew Segal, an affiliated practitioner at Yale Law School’s Brodie Center for Jewish and Israeli Law, told JNS.
“People engaged in discrimination often have political motives, too,” he told JNS. “The KKK surely did.”
Segal joined University of California, Los Angeles law professor Jon D. Michaels and George Mason University law professor David E. Bernstein in submitting the brief.
The janitors alleged that protesters used anti-Jewish slurs during their takeover of the building. Torres was called a “Jew-lover,” while Wilson was told that “you work for the Jews,” according to allegations cited in the brief.
Colleen McMahon, a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, dismissed their federal claims on June 1. The amicus brief argues that she improperly resolved disputed questions about the protesters’ motives before the workers could obtain evidence through discovery.
They also challenge the court’s reliance on disagreement among Jews over whether anti-Zionism is inherently antisemitic.
“Federal district courts simply cannot summon the Jewish people, at the pleadings stage, to serve as an imagined expert witness for defendants accused of anti-Jewish animus,” the brief states.
