Nine US attorneys resign over Trump administration’s ‘fraudulent’ anti-Semitism probe
Nine US attorneys resigned after being pressured by the administration of President Donald Trump to conclude that campuses had violated the civil rights of Jewish students and staff, according to a Los Angeles Times investigation exposing what has been described as a politically driven and legally baseless campaign targeting pro-Palestinian activism at the University of California (UC).
In interviews with The Times, nine former Department of Justice (DoJ) attorneys said they were instructed to prepare lawsuits against UC campuses even before investigations had begun, a practice one attorney described as a “fraudulent and sham investigation.”
“Initially we were told we only had 30 days to come up with a reason to be ready to sue UC,” said Ejaz Baluch, a former senior trial attorney tasked with probing alleged anti-Semitism at UCLA. “It shows just how unserious this exercise was. It was not about trying to find out what really happened.”All nine attorneys resigned between January and June 2025, some citing fears they were being asked to violate ethical and legal standards. Others warned the process had been hijacked by political appointees pursuing ideological objectives.
The investigation coincided with pro-Palestinian protests at several UC campuses in response to Israel’s genocide, which has killed over 72,000 Palestinians. Some Jewish students alleged they faced hostility and filed formal complaints, while many Jewish students were also among the encampment organisers opposing the genocide.
A federal lawsuit filed by a group of Jewish UCLA students in 2024 accused the university of failing to protect them from anti-Semitic hostility. UC settled in July 2025 for $6.45 million, agreeing to restrict protest and reform policy. The case, along with coverage from conservative media outlets, became a basis for the DoJ investigation, former attorneys said.
DoJ staff, however, insist the process was manipulated from the start. Several said they were forced to write a “justification memo” for suing UC before gathering evidence. One described being reassigned from investigating other discrimination cases to focus solely on UC.
“It was clear to so many of us that this was a political hit job that actually would end up not helping anyone,” said one lawyer. “It was like UCLA was the crown jewel among public universities that the Trump administration wanted to ‘get,’ similar to Harvard for privates.” Harvard was also subjected pressure by the Trump administration over its handling of protestors.
When findings were finally published in July 2025, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon accused UCLA of violating federal civil rights law by failing to act against campus hostility targeting Jewish students and staff. The Trump administration demanded that UC pay $1.2 billion and implement sweeping changes.
Last month, a federal judge ruled that the DoJ’s proposed settlement was “coercive and retaliatory” and likely violated the First Amendment. The judge blocked the fine and policy changes, though talks between the administration and UC continue behind closed doors.
A former deputy chief, Jen Swedish, called the probe “atypical in every sense,” adding, “The political appointees essentially determined the outcome almost before the investigation had even started.”
Another attorney, Dena Robinson, who is Jewish, warned: “I’m highly sceptical this administration actually cares about Jewish people or anti-Semitism.”