Jewish Insider:Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, urged pro-Israel college students to distinguish between protected speech and actionable discriminatory conduct — "people literally interfering with your ability to get an education" — when facing antisemitism on campus. "Holding a red triangle over a student's head in a mob setting and saying 'Jews not welcome' is much closer to not protected speech." It so happens I've written two articles on exactly that theme, i.e., distinguishing between protected speech and unprotected conduct. So, first, the court held that proof of discriminatory animus is required, but also held that contextual evidence that would show that discriminatory animus is barred. And, second, the notion that discriminatory animus is required for hostile environment claims to begin with seems clearly wrong.