Federal agency files amicus brief in sexual harassment suit against Penn

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed an amicus brief last week, requesting a federal appeals court reexamine the legal foundation of a sexual harassment lawsuit against Penn. 

In the original lawsuit, 2022 School of Design graduate and research associate Sophia O’Neill alleged that Penn failed to protect her from sex-based discrimination. The Feb. 20 brief argued in favor of adopting a negligence standard in the suit, which holds employers liable for failing to address harassment issues in the workplace.

In November 2025, a judge granted Penn summary judgment in the case, arguing that in order to be found liable for harassment by a third party, an employer must “desire” the harassment or “be substantially certain it will occur.” O’Neill appealed the case. 

A request for comment was left with a University spokesperson.

In the brief, the EEOC urged the court to adopt a negligence standard for the appeal. If adopted, the standard would lower the plaintiff’s burden of proof and make it easier for O’Neill to win on appeal. 

The brief argued that “the overwhelming weight of authority supports a negligence standard,” adding that “this Court and the majority of other circuits have consistently applied a negligence standard in cases involving third-party harassment.”

The brief clarified that the EEOC “takes no position on any other issue presented,” including whether O’Neill would meet the negligence standard or if the appeal should be decided in her favor.

“For the foregoing reasons, the EEOC urges this Court to clarify that negligence is the appropriate standard for determining when an employer is liable for third-party harassment under Title VII,” the agency concluded. 

The original lawsuit claimed that Penn violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance by failing to “remedy the sex-based harassment that plagued [O’Neill’s] work environment” and engaging in “retaliatory actions” against O’Neill for reporting the harassment.  

The lawsuit alleged that for her work as a teaching assistant, O’Neill was assigned to supervise a “mentally unstable male student” who had previously engaged in “sex-based harassment” of fellow students. The suit also alleged that a student in the design studio O'Neill worked at sent her harassing messages, and that O’Neill was subjected to “sexist, belittling, and harassing behavior” by a former lab manager.

---