The Hamilton, Texas City Manager, claims the police didn't threaten her or forcibly remove the sign, but that "a police member visited the owner’s home, and the owner asked the officer to take the sign.”
The Office for Civil Rights decision is in some ways opaque and equivocal, but the message to universities seems pretty powerful -- such decisions about enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights of Act may turn on whether the university tolerates certain criticisms of Israel that OCR has now labeled "anti-Semitic."
A very brief history of the rise and fall (and potential rise again) of campus speech codes. [UPDATE: Very sorry, at first accidentally labeled this as my post -- it's actually Greg Lukianoff's & Adam Goldstein's.]
The policy -- here, applied to someone passing out religious valentines -- also bans "signs ... with offensive content," and more generally limits even nonoffensive signs and leafleting to a narrow "free speech zone."
[UPDATE: The university is now reported (as of Friday, May 25) to be saying that no investigation is taking place, and that the original student newspaper account saying that there was such an investigation was mistaken; but the university hadn't responded to FIRE's earlier queries about the matter, and it hadn't responded to my query before I had to put up my post.]