MIT files motion to dismiss antisemitism complaint
Institute defends itself from claims of direct discrimination or deliberate indifference
Vivian Hir–The Tech
On Oct. 8, MIT filed a motion to dismiss a complaint from Lior Alon, an instructor and former postdoctoral fellow in the mathematics department, and Will Sussman, a former graduate student in EECS, who accused the Institute and Professor of Linguistics Michel DeGraff of antisemitism. The Louis D. Brandeis Center Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism and an anonymous MIT affiliate joined as plaintiffs.
The original complaint from Jun. 25 alleged that MIT failed to quell certain pro-Palestinian rhetoric that the plaintiffs found antisemitic or anti-Israeli, including statements by DeGraff, thereby creating what they deemed a hostile climate. In particular, the complaint alleges that MIT violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids discrimination based on race in programs receiving federal funding, and Title VII, which forbids employment discrimination.
Alon and Sussman mention interactions with DeGraff on social media, including a disagreement on X after Sussman criticized DeGraff’s characterization of Zionism as a “mind infection.” The exchange prompted Sussman to pursue a harassment complaint against DeGraff through MIT’s Institute Discrimination and Harassment Response Office.
John Doe, an anonymous former postdoctoral associate at MIT who now works as an instructor at a different Institute department, joined as a plaintiff on an amended version of the complaint filed Sept. 17. Doe, who is Israeli, accuses his labmates and PI of antisemitic and anti-Israeli hostility. He argues that he was dismissed from his lab because of his identity.
In their motion, MIT argues that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any “direct discrimination” by the Institute against Jewish or Israeli community members. Rather, the Institute’s motion recounts a concerted effort by university leaders to curb antisemitic activity on campus since Oct. 2023, far from the “deliberate indifference” standard required in Title VI cases for prosecution of indirect discrimination.
MIT also reports that Doe “received MIT’s assistance to transition to another (higher paid) position” despite his claims. The motion contends that the Louis D. Brandeis Center lacks standing because the plaintiffs failed to show a unified “theory of discrimination” against Jewish students on campus.
In its argument, MIT underscores Alon and Sussman’s deliberate choice to engage publicly in political discourse regarding the conflict in Gaza. It stated that DeGraff’s disagreements — also public — were with the plaintiff’s political views, not their ethnicity or religion.
Kimberly Allen, an MIT spokesperson, wrote to The Tech that “our motion speaks for itself.” She stated that MIT does not comment on individual personnel.
At the time of publication, Alon and Sussman did not respond to The Tech’s request for comment.