On August 19, 2025, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) found itself at the epicenter of a high-stakes battle over academic freedom, campus safety, and the boundaries of federal intervention. More than 360 Jewish faculty members at UCLA—representing a strikingly diverse array of political and personal perspectives—united to publicly denounce the Trump administration’s demand for a staggering $1 billion fine and the freezing of over half a billion dollars in research funding over allegations of campus antisemitism. Their message, detailed in a forceful letter addressed to the University of California’s Board of Regents, reflected both the urgency of the moment and deep divisions within the Jewish community itself.
According to The Los Angeles Times, the letter, titled “Jews in Defense of UC,” was crafted amid growing concern that the administration’s actions were less about combating antisemitism and more about leveraging the issue to reshape higher education in line with the president’s political agenda. “Cutting off hundreds of millions of research funds will do nothing to make UCLA safer for Jews nor diminish antisemitism in the world,” the letter stated. “It will not benefit Jewish Bruins nor Jews beyond campus who make extensive use of its first-rate medical facilities, ground-breaking scientific innovations, and cutting-edge cultural institutions.”
The Trump administration’s actions have been dramatic and controversial. The U.S. Department of Justice, citing what it called UCLA’s “deliberate indifference” to Jewish students’ civil rights, froze $584 million in federal grants and demanded a $1 billion settlement, along with an additional $172 million for a claims fund and the imposition of an outside monitor. Negotiations between the administration and UC officials are ongoing, but the university has labeled the current proposal “unacceptable.” California Governor Gavin Newsom has weighed in, stating that the state is prepared to sue and urging UC not to “bend the knee” to federal pressure.
The faculty letter, expected to be delivered to the Regents by August 19, reflects a rare unity among Jewish scholars at UCLA, many of whom are deeply divided over issues such as Israel’s war in Gaza and the very definition of antisemitism. The signatories span the spectrum from self-described “anti-Zionist Jews” to ardent supporters of Israel. Yet, as The Los Angeles Times reports, they have found common ground in their condemnation of what they see as the “weaponization” of antisemitism for political ends. “We urge the Trump administration to cease its attempts to deprive institutions such as ours of vital research funds intended to save and improve lives,” the letter continued. “And we ask that it cease its misplaced efforts to withhold funds in the name of combating antisemitism.”
Behind the scenes, the letter came together with remarkable speed. UCLA law professor Ariela Gross, one of the organizers, said the aim was to show the Regents that Jewish voices at the university “really want to fight.” She explained, “We do not want to back down. And we don’t think that you can negotiate with an extortionist. It seems particularly important for Jewish community members to [express this], given that this is being so cynically done in our name—antisemitism is being used as the fig leaf excuse for all of these actions.”
David N. Myers, a professor of Jewish history and another organizer, worried that if UCLA or Harvard, both currently in the administration’s crosshairs, were to settle, it could set a “dangerous” precedent. “It’s hard not to see some method in the madness to try and bring down these two institutions,” he told The Los Angeles Times. “If they agree to a settlement, then probably every subsequent institution will do the same. What I find dangerous is not just the bankrupting of these extraordinary institutions ... but also the attempt to impose supervision and restraints on scholarship and intellectual discourse.”
The conflict at UCLA has unfolded against the backdrop of intense campus unrest. In April 2024, violent clashes broke out on Royce Quad during pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian demonstrations, drawing global attention and fierce criticism of law enforcement’s response. The encampment included Jewish students on both sides of the debate, highlighting the complexity of Jewish identity and opinion at UCLA. Some signatories to the letter, like Dov Waxman, professor of Israel studies, acknowledged that antisemitism is a real issue but argued it has been “grossly overstated and exaggerated to serve other political purposes and ideological agendas.”
Others, like Beth Ribet, a lecturer who teaches about Nazism and white nationalism, took a different view. Ribet, who identifies as an “anti-Zionist Jew,” asserted that the most violent antisemitism on campus was the attack on pro-Palestinian protesters, some of whom were Jewish. “The discussions that the Trump administration and the UCLA administration have propounded about antisemitism represent a profound distortion of its actual meaning,” she said. “The problem of antisemitism that they are describing does not match what we are experiencing.”
Not all prominent Jewish voices at UCLA signed the letter. Judea Pearl, a computer science professor and outspoken supporter of Israel, declined, explaining that the letter “does not propose any constructive step toward addressing antisemitism and the anti-Zionist culture nourished at UCLA in some departments.” Pearl’s own research grant, suspended as part of the federal crackdown, was reinstated on August 12 by court order. Myers, however, countered that the administration’s threats “have anything to do with fighting antisemitism. That is not the turf on which this battle should be waged.”
The Trump administration’s aggressive posture toward higher education is not limited to UCLA. On August 15, a federal judge in Maryland ruled that the administration violated federal law and the Constitution by shutting down the U.S. Department of Education’s Comprehensive Centers and Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs), programs that provide crucial technical assistance and research support to schools and districts across the country. The judge ordered that the programs be restored by September 30, after finding that the cancellations—part of a broader effort to terminate contracts and grants deemed “wasteful and ideologically driven”—were unlawful and infringed on Congressional authority.
These technical assistance centers, according to Education Week, play a vital role in supporting low-income students, developing educator training, and helping states like Mississippi achieve major improvements in literacy. The Trump administration’s decision to cancel their funding, citing alleged promotion of “radical agendas,” sparked lawsuits from contractors and condemnation from education leaders. In his ruling, Judge Brendan Hurson dismissed the administration’s arguments that the terminations were merely a pause, noting the lack of credible effort to restore the required number of centers. The ruling was hailed as “important progress towards restoring essential, high-quality federal education research” by Rachel Dinkes, president and CEO of Knowledge Alliance.
As the standoff continues, the stakes for UCLA—and for American higher education more broadly—could hardly be higher. With hundreds of millions in research funding on the line, and the threat of precedent-setting settlements looming, the coming weeks will test the resolve of university leaders, faculty, and policymakers alike. For now, the chorus of Jewish voices at UCLA stands as a testament to the power of unity and dissent in the face of what many see as a profound challenge to academic freedom and institutional integrity.
How this conflict is resolved will likely reverberate far beyond the campus quads of Los Angeles, shaping the future of federal involvement in higher education and the ongoing debate over the meaning and boundaries of antisemitism in America.
