Eugene has already blogged about Stand With Us v. MIT, a recent case in which the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a hostile environment claim against MIT brought on behalf of Jewish students.

Eugene's post focused on the question of whether a university can be required to suppress speech intensely hostile to Israel and/or Zionists to avoid hostile environment liability. The court said "no," Eugene approves, and as a general matter, I agree.

However, the court went well beyond that holding, into what I consider bizarre, obviously incorrect legal reason. I was particularly struck by this passage:

Our conclusion that plaintiffs have failed to allege actionable racial harassment consists of three parts. To begin, most of the conduct about which plaintiffs complain is

See Full Page