A federal judge agreed Monday to delay his order that the University of Pennsylvania comply with a Trump administration subpoena for information about Jews on campus.
The judge, Gerald J. Pappert of the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, had ruled in March that Penn had until this Friday to turn over the records that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sought as a part of an investigation into antisemitism.
But as the deadline neared, Judge Pappert agreed to pause his order while Penn pursued its appeal. Monday’s ruling means that Penn is no longer facing an imminent deadline to share, among other records, the names and contact information it has for people who worked in the university’s Jewish studies program or were members of “clubs, organizations and recreation groups” that were related to “the Jewish religion, faith, ancestry/national origin.”
The E.E.O.C. did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Penn issued a one-sentence statement: “Now that the stay has been granted, we can proceed with the appeal process.”
The clash between the E.E.O.C. and Penn has emerged as a crucial test of the Trump administration’s tactics to scrutinize and pressure universities. Although the commission opened an inquiry into Penn in 2023, it was not until last year, after President Trump took office, that the investigation gathered force.
Penn spent much of last year privately rebuffing some of the commission’s demands. The dispute became public in November, though, when the E.E.O.C. filed a lawsuit over a subpoena. The commission has insisted that its push for information was not unusual, and that it needed to be able to reach people at Penn who might know about violations of civil rights laws.
Penn countered that the administration had made a “disconcerting” and unconstitutional demand. Some people at the university have suggested that the government’s approach to collecting information about Jews on campus was reminiscent of Nazi Germany.
“The E.E.O.C. insists that Penn produce this information without the consent — and indeed, over the objections — of the employees impacted while entirely disregarding the frightening and well-documented history of governmental entities that undertook efforts to identify and assemble information regarding persons of Jewish ancestry,” the university said in a court filing in January.
The university argued that the demand could violate people’s privacy and First Amendment rights.
But Judge Pappert broadly rejected Penn’s arguments, writing at the end of March that Penn’s constitutional concerns were “easily dispensed with” and that it was “counterproductive” to liken the E.E.O.C.’s inquiry to the methods that the Nazis used when they ran Germany.
Judge Pappert, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, signaled that he recognized the concern that the subpoena had provoked, particularly a push for information tied to groups “related to the Jewish religion.” But he said the request “had an understandable purpose,” even though it was “ineptly worded.”
Judge Pappert’s decision about the university’s bid for a stay followed weeks of legal volleying as Penn moved the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Penn pleaded with Judge Pappert to stay his order because it said the case raised “complex, novel and constitutional issues” and would cause harm if the university had to supply the records prematurely.
Other groups that had opposed the E.E.O.C.’s subpoena, including the American Association of University Professors and Penn’s Jewish Law Students Association, had also pushed for a delay.
But the E.E.O.C. argued that Penn was stalling the E.E.O.C.’s investigation and noted that a court could ultimately order the commission to destroy any records it had obtained.
“E.E.O.C., investigating and litigating on behalf of the public interest, is seriously compromised when it cannot perform its functions efficiently and timely,” the commission said in a court filing on April 17. “Were this matter stayed through an appeal, memories fade, witnesses and victims leave the organization, and potential harassing behavior persists.”
It is not entirely clear how much information Penn has available to share.
Penn, for example, has said that it did not have lists of employees by religion or the membership lists of Jewish groups on campus. In March, Judge Pappert said the university would have to provide what information it had but that Penn would not have to disclose any employee’s connection to any specific group.
In a tart, 12-page ruling on Monday, Judge Pappert appeared reluctant to grant Penn’s request for a delay. But he ultimately concluded that the public interest and the challenge of rolling back the consequences of a hasty disclosure warranted a stay.
“The E.E.O.C. asserts the public has an interest in the E.E.O.C. investigating a valid charge of discrimination, and that is true, but the public also has an interest in the orderly resolution of this case through the ordinary appellate process,” Judge Pappert wrote.
Penn and others involved in the case, he said, had “mischaracterized” the inquiry and his decision. But, he said, the Third Circuit deserved time to weigh the case “absent unnecessary procedural deadlines.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/27/us/trump-subpoena-list-jews-university-pennsylvania.html
