A federal judge presiding over a case involving Harvard University has accused the Trump administration of employing antisemitism as a diversionary tactic. The case revolves around allegations that Harvard discriminates against Asian American applicants in its admissions process. The judge criticized the administration’s intervention in the lawsuit, suggesting that it was using claims of antisemitism to distract from the main issue at hand.

The judge’s remarks came during a hearing where the Justice Department argued that Harvard had failed to comply with a court order to produce certain documents related to its admissions policies. The administration has sided with the group suing Harvard, alleging that the university’s admissions process unfairly disadvantages Asian American applicants. However, the judge questioned the motives behind the administration’s involvement, specifically calling out the use of antisemitism allegations.

In response to the judge’s accusations, a White House official defended the administration’s stance, emphasizing its commitment to fighting discrimination in all forms. The administration’s intervention in the Harvard case is seen as part of a broader effort to address alleged bias in college admissions processes.

Legal experts note that the involvement of the Trump administration in a case concerning allegations of discrimination at Harvard reflects a growing trend of federal intervention in such matters. The debate over affirmative action and diversity in higher education has long been contentious, with legal battles often centering on questions of fairness and equal opportunity.

As the case continues to unfold, the accusations of using antisemitism as a smokescreen by the judge raise important questions about the intersection of politics, discrimination, and legal proceedings. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for how universities approach their admissions processes and how the government addresses allegations of bias in educational institutions.