Multiple Penn-affiliated groups filed a motion on Tuesday to intervene as defendants in an ongoing lawsuit filed against the University by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
During a Jan. 13 press conference, the national and Penn chapters of the American Association of University Professors, the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Jewish Law Students Association, the Penn Association of Senior and Emeritus Faculty, and the American Academy of Jewish Research announced their intent to intervene. If the motion is granted, the groups would become defendants in the lawsuit alongside Penn.
Requests for comment were left with a University spokesperson and the EEOC.
The lawsuit followed a July 2025 subpoena from the EEOC that required Penn to submit detailed information on workplace antisemitism complaints and membership lists for various Jewish-related campus groups. In November, the agency sued the University for allegedly failing to comply.
In a memo filed in support of the motion to intervene, the five proposed groups wrote that they have “a direct personal stake and a unique interest in safeguarding their members’ distinct First Amendment freedoms.”
Although Penn has refused to comply with specific provisions of the EEOC subpoena, the memo stated that the University’s decision could change under pressure from the federal government.
According to Matthew Hamermesh — one of the attorneys who filed the motion — the filing is “a request that the court recognize the interests of our clients and allow them to be heard as parties in the case opposing enforcement of the subpoena.”
Penn Carey Law and Wharton School professor Amanda Shanor — one of the lawyers representing the intervening Penn-affiliated organizations — told The Daily Pennsylvanian that the motion would enable intervenors to file their own briefs and provide additional legal reasoning against the lawsuit.
RELATED:
Penn withdraws motion to reassign EEOC lawsuit, citing federal judge resignation
Penn motions for judge reassignment in EEOC lawsuit, citing judicial efficiency
Shanor, who also helped circulate a petition criticizing the lawsuit in November 2025, added that the presence of intervenors would mean that the lawsuit could continue to be litigated even if Penn chooses not to proceed.
At the press conference, American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania Legal Director Witold Walczak stated that the EEOC subpoenas would require Penn to turn over “personal telephone numbers, personal emails, and home addresses.”
Walczak added that the right of organizations not to share membership lists was established in the 1958 Supreme Court case NAACP v. Alabama. He explained that forced disclosure “chills people’s willingness and ability to come together in any kind of political or religious association.”
Associate Dean for Graduate Studies Beth Wenger, who represented the American Academy for Jewish Research, said that “the act of singling out Jews in this manner suggests they don’t have the same rights under the law as other Americans.”
Steven Weitzman, the Ella Darivoff Director of the Katz Center of Advanced Judaic Studies and a member of the University Task Force on Antisemitism, similarly emphasized the “immediate and negative impact” of the EEOC subpoena requests.
“To be blunt, I don’t want my employer handing over information about my religious identity without my consent, and I think it is a violation of the First Amendment for the government to be forcing a university to do so,” Weitzman added.
Mitch Marcus, PASEF President and professor emeritus in the Department of Computer and Information Science at Penn, wrote in a statement to the DP that a requirement for the University to “hand over to the federal government lists of our members would have a chilling effect on their participation in all of our activities as well as threaten their rights of association and academic freedom.”
“For our retired and senior faculty born in the years following the Holocaust, the thought of having their names turned over to the government because they are Jews brings back the nightmare experiences of our parents and grandparents,” Marcus added. “For our members who decades ago fled authoritarian governments in fear of their lives, this demand brings back terrifying memories.”
A spokesperson for the Jewish Law Students Association at Penn Carey Law also wrote in a statement to the DP that the group chose to intervene in the lawsuit because it is “strongly opposed to the EEOC—or any government agency—mandating the production of a blanket list of Jews.”
The spokesperson added that the group acknowledges “efforts by the EEOC to address the disturbing rise in antisemitism, including as experienced by members of our community at Penn,” but hopes that the agency conducts “the investigation in a way that makes the Jewish community feel supported, rather than threatened.”
Earlier this month, a judge set a Jan. 20 deadline for Penn to submit a response to the subpoena.
“We will file a response to the subpoena at that time explaining the constitutional and statutory rights that enforcement of the subpoena would impair and why what the EEOC proposes to do is so fraught for the Jewish community,” Hamermesh said.
Staff reporter Rachel Erhag contributed reporting.
RELATED:
Penn withdraws motion to reassign EEOC lawsuit, citing federal judge resignation
Penn motions for judge reassignment in EEOC lawsuit, citing judicial efficiency
Staff reporter Lavanya Mani covers legal affairs and can be reached at lavmani@sas.upenn.edu. At Penn, she studies English. Follow her on X @lavanyamani_.
