(RNS) — The day before Passover, a federal judge ordered the University of Pennsylvania to comply with a subpoena from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission seeking to obtain lists of Jews who may have experienced or witnessed antisemitism, as part of an investigation into antisemitism on that campus.

Judge Gerald J. Pappert of Philadelphia’s Federal District Court ruled that the subpoena falls within the government’s authority, even though he acknowledged the Trump administration “ineptly worded” the request.

University leaders, joined by Jewish faculty and students, have pushed back. They argue that any demand to compile lists of Jews raises serious constitutional and moral concerns and risks chilling Jewish life on campus.

Many Jews support efforts to investigate antisemitism at Penn, and I am one of them. Jewish students have described a hostile environment at the university during protests and campus debates. 

As author Rafael Medoff writes in “The Road to October 7: Hamas, the Holocaust, and the Eternal War Against the Jews,” of a conference hosted at Penn: 

“In late September 2023, four university departments co-sponsored a two-day literary festival on campus called ‘Palestine Writes,’ featuring several speakers who had compared Israel to Nazi Germany, accused ‘Zionists’ of controlling the media, and blamed European Jews for their own persecution during the Holocaust. Festival organizer Susan Abulhawa, an author and BDS activist, had tweeted that she ‘takes comfort in knowing’ that Israel eventually will be ‘wiped off the map.'” 

After Oct. 7, Jewish students at Penn were subjected to taunts of “You’re a dirty little Jew, you deserve to die.” In congressional hearings, lawmakers pressed university leaders — including Penn’s then-president, Liz Magill — on whether calls for violence against Jews violated campus policies. Her infamous response was that it depended on the “context.” 

Universities need to take claims of antisemitism seriously. But Jews also know that some methods of investigation — even those that are ostensibly in support of Jews — cross a line that history has burned into memory. 

Like, the memory of lists. They recall how Nazi officials entered towns across Europe and demanded lists of Jews from local authorities. In Vienna, officials used detailed registries to isolate Jewish families. In the Netherlands, civil records allowed occupiers to identify and deport Jews with chilling efficiency.

Oh, please, you might say. Are you being “triggered”?

As a matter of fact, yes. There is a folk saying that shows up in several cultures, that someone who has been bitten by a snake will be afraid even of a rope. The rope is harmless, but it reminds you of that snake that bit you.

For Jews, history has often been a snake that bites. Memories can create trauma, which can create sensitivity, even hypersensitivity, even when we might have imagined that such sensitivities would have faded into the past.

That snake that bites is not only in the European past; it is also in the American present. Why shouldn’t Jews be afraid of any governmental institution — of any administration — having access to lists of Jews? Certainly of this administration, wherein there have been murmurs about the “globalists” (cue: antisemitic dog whistle) and the Great Replacement Theory, the conspiracy that alleges that Jews are bringing in darker-skinned immigrants to replace white Americans.

Judge Pappert said that comparisons to Nazi Germany are counterproductive. No, your honor, that is a failure of imagination. It is not that this subpoena mimics Nazi policy. But we would be deaf if we did not hear its rhyme and echo.

When leaders dismiss those echoes and memories, they do not calm fears; they deepen them. They send a message that Jewish history does not matter.

Neither can you dismiss the timing of this decision — on the very doorstep of Passover.

The very purpose of Passover is to remember. When Jews hear the word “lists,” they do not automatically think of “Schindler’s List” — a list of those to be saved. We hear lists, and we think of those who had demonic designs against us.

As Jonathan Safran Foer wrote in “Everything Is Illuminated”:

The pinpricks of memory: We were slaves; we were vulnerable; we lived at the whim of tyrants. We sit at the Passover Seder, and we read the Haggadah, which states: “In every generation, a person is commanded to see themselves as if they had personally left Egypt.”

If you want freedom and safety, then you must be vigilant. Vigilance requires an early warning system. If in this case that early warning system seems a tad too sensitive, it is because we have been bitten by too many snakes.

Passover offers a blueprint. The Seder relies on storytelling. It calls on those around the table not only to sing, not only to bless, but to speak, to question, to bear witness. If we want to confront antisemitism effectively, we should follow that model.

The government may possess the legal authority to demand information. But legality alone does not resolve moral questions. Wisdom requires sensitivity to history, especially when that history carries trauma. Jews ask not for exemption from investigation, but for recognition of what certain actions mean in light of their past.

What is the solution? Rather simple. Investigators can ask Jewish students, faculty and staff to come forward voluntarily and testify. They can create safe, confidential channels for reporting antisemitism. They can partner with Jewish organizations on campus and beyond. They can listen. That approach respects both the urgency of the problem and the dignity of the people affected.

Let this administration fight antisemitism. But let it also be sensitive to Jewish fears.

And to all of you, a joyous Passover and holiday season.