The chamber released a report on the investigation into anti-Semitism of senior management

House Republicans criticized private elite colleges and some state flagship universities on how they handled pro-Palestinian protests in a new report that says anti-Semitism has swept college campuses and administrators are favoring “terrorists” over the Jewish community.

In a caustic The report is on 325 pages On Thursday, Republicans on the House Education and Workforce Committee detailed the findings of their yearlong investigation into anti-Semitism at 11 colleges. Most of the findings repeat many of the same points they made publicly after Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023.

John Fansmith, senior vice president of government relations and national advocacy for the American Council on Education, said the report was a “totally partisan effort” that wasted a significant chance for productive analysis.

“We had an opportunity during the hearings, and now through more than 300 pages of report language, to look at what are the solutions? (To) identify issues, identify best practices (and) think about ways to actually directly help students, especially Jewish students,” Fensmith said. But the final report is just a continuation of the same scenario, and “that’s unfortunate,” he added.

Other higher education experts and lobbyists say the report demonstrates the weaponization of anti-Semitism and blurs the fine line between protecting free speech and civil rights. They also questioned the federal government’s role in overseeing colleges.

“This report is further evidence that the House Committee is trying to use these painful divisions to interfere with, undermine, and delegitimize American higher education in the public mind,” said American Association of University Professors President Todd Wolfson. Inside the higher ed. “Government intervention in higher education is a dangerous path to take, and this should be a moment of clarity for faculty, staff and students on our campuses.”

Chaired by Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, a Republican from North Carolina, the committee received more than 400,000 pages of documents as part of a wide-ranging investigation into protest management, disciplinary actions and efforts to protect Jewish students, faculty and staff. Ultimately, the committee said it found university management had made “shocking concessions” to the protesters; deliberately refused to support Jewish students, faculty and staff; failed to implement meaningful discipline; and openly expressed hostility to the idea of ​​congressional oversight.

“University administrators, faculty and staff were cowards who completely capitulated to the mob and failed the students they were supposed to serve,” Fox said in a news release. “It’s time for the executive branch to enforce the law and enforce law enforcement at colleges and universities and ensure a safe learning environment for all students.”

The report did not find that the colleges violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, and covers discrimination based on common origin, which includes anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. However, Congress should not detect violations. i.e under competence Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education. Colleges that violate the law may eventually lose federal funding, though an unlikely outcome.

Still, the committee wrote that its findings indicated a “hostile environment toward Jewish students that likely violates Title VI,” and chided the Education Department for not doing enough to hold colleges accountable. Ultimately, however, the committee said its findings did not constitute “conclusive determinations of violations.”

This investigation is one of several currently ongoing in the House. The report will contribute to the wider overall investigation.

“The committee’s findings indicate the need for a fundamental reevaluation of federal support for institutions of higher education that have failed to meet their obligations to protect Jewish students, faculty, and staff, and to maintain a safe and continuous learning environment for all students,” the report said. said

“McCarthyism is alive and well”

While criticism of the university’s outward-facing actions has been commonplace since campus unrest began on Oct. 7, 2023, the report sheds new light on what was going on behind the scenes.

Some of the more notable findings include the reactions of college presidents after Hill was questioned.

Notes from a Dec. 10 Harvard University board meeting show contempt for Congress from then-President Claudine Gay, who was called to testify at the hearing on December 5 along with the presidents of the University of Pennsylvania and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The records show that she began her remarks by admitting her inability to clearly speak out against anti-Semitism. But then Gay quickly shifted focus to Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican and Harvard graduate who sharply criticized the Harvard leader at the hearing. Gay said it’s difficult to see the “moral core” of the university being called into question “especially (especially) by someone who is a hatemonger” and a “supporter of proud boys.” (sic).

Then-Pennsylvania board chairman Scott Bock told former Penn State president Liz Magill that Republicans calling for Magill’s resignation were “so easily bribed.”

Lawmakers also cited text messages exchanged between former Columbia University president Minoush Shafiq and board of trustees co-chair Claire Shipman shortly after Shafik’s hearing on April 17. Shipman wrote about how New York Times coverage of the event “grafted” Manhattan ivy from the same “capital”. (sic) a hill of nonsense and menace,” like Harvard.

(Magill and Gay both resigned shortly after the first hearing. Shafiq also resignedbut five months passed between the hearing and its announcement.)

Republicans say the comments show the administrators were more concerned with public image than confronting anti-Semitism and had an unyielding hostility to congressional oversight.

But according to Edward Ahmed Mitchell, national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, there is a certain sardonism to these findings.

“The irony is that for years Republicans in Congress have complained about federal involvement in the education system,” Ahmed Mitchell said. “Now they suddenly want federal intervention because they believe the federal government may have a weapon to force colleges and universities to silence students and college professors who advocate for Palestinian rights.”

“This is McCarthyism alive and well,” he added.

Fensmith believes there must be a federal role in holding colleges and universities accountable, noting that the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights has opened more than 100 investigations into alleged Title VI violations. But this oversight has its limits.

“This effort has less to do with real accountability or a proper response … and (is) more of an attempt to influence campuses — to try to get them to move in directions that suit the political goals of one group or another,” he said. said

Crushing ivory towers

Republicans and Jewish rights groups applauded the committee’s efforts to hold colleges accountable.

Kenneth Marcus, founder of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Legal Advocacy and former head of OCR under the Trump administration, said the report uses the power of the congressional podium to reinforce what Jewish organizations have been saying for years.

“The main message,” he said, “is that many college administrators are willfully indifferent to the rise of anti-Semitism on their campuses.”

But even more important than the committee’s language, Marcus added, are the documents themselves. According to him, the participants in the court proceedings will “understand” them. About half of the report contains fragments of documents collected by the committee.

“Government investigators should be doing that, too,” he said. “The documents are, at a minimum, a public embarrassment for many colleges and, perhaps worse, a potential source of liability.”

Stefanyk said in news release that the report shows the “moral bankruptcy” of “once ‘elite’ higher education institutions” and that they are suffering the consequences.

“For decades to come, these universities face a retribution that will bring down their ivory towers,” she said.

Meanwhile, a Northwestern University spokesperson said the report “ignores the hard work our community has put in since (last spring’s hearing).” “We continue to add resources and expand educational opportunities in line with our commitment to protect our community while facilitating the productive exchange of ideas,” wrote John Yates, vice president of global marketing and communications. “The university objects to the unfair characterization of our chancellor and valued members of our faculty based on isolated and out-of-context communications (and) unequivocally supports them and their work on behalf of our students.”

Other colleges and universities named in the report, including Harvard and UCLA, generally declined to comment on the report and instead pointed to changes that have been and will be made to combat anti-Semitism on campus.

“Under new university leadership, we have created a centralized Office of Institutional Equity to handle all reports of discrimination and harassment, appointed a new policy administrator, and expanded the capabilities of our Office of Public Safety,” a Columbia University spokesperson wrote in an email. . “We strive to apply the rules fairly, consistently and effectively.”

Inside the higher ed also reached out to Rutgers University, MIT and Penn State, which participated in the hearing and were included in the report, but did not hear back.