House Republicans lashed out elite private schools and some emblematic state universities for how they have handled pro-Palestinian protests in a new report in which they argue that anti-Semitism has invaded university campuses and that administrators prioritized “terrorist sympathizers” over the Jewish community.

in the biting 325 page report Released Thursday, Republicans on the House Education and Workforce Committee detailed the findings of their year-long investigation into anti-Semitism at 11 colleges. Most of the findings reiterated many of the same points they have been making publicly since the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.

Jon Fansmith, senior vice president of government relations and national engagement at the American Council on Education, said the report is a “totally partisan effort” that squandered a significant opportunity for productive analysis.

“We had the opportunity through hearings, and now through more than 300 pages of reports, to analyze what the solutions are. (To) identify problems, identify best practices (and) think about ways to directly help students, especially Jewish students,” Fansmith said. But the final report is simply a continuation of the same script, and “it’s unfortunate,” he added.

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

“This report is further evidence that the House Committee is attempting to exploit these painful divisions to interfere with, undermine and delegitimize American higher education in the public’s mind,” said American Association of University Professors President Todd Wolfson, in a statement to Within higher education. “Government interference in higher education is a dangerous path down a road and this must be a moment of clarity for faculty, staff and students on our campuses.”

Led by Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., the committee received more than 400,000 pages of documents as part of its extensive investigation into the handling of the protests, disciplinary actions and efforts to protect students, faculty and staff. Jews. In the end, the committee said it found that university leaders made “shocking concessions” to protesters; intentionally refused to support Jewish students, faculty, and staff; failed to impose meaningful discipline; and openly expressed hostility toward 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,” Foxx said in a news release. “It is time for the executive branch to enforce the laws and ensure that colleges and universities restore order and ensure that all students have a safe learning environment.”

The report stopped short of finding that the universities 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 shared ancestry, including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. However, finding violations is not up to Congress. That is under the competition from the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights. Universities that violate the law could ultimately lose federal funds, although that is an unlikely outcome.

Still, the committee wrote that its findings show “an environment hostile to Jewish students that likely violates Title VI” and chastised the Department of Education for not doing enough to hold colleges accountable. Ultimately, however, the committee said its findings do not amount to “conclusive judgments about violations.”

This research is one of several currently underway at home. The report will contribute to the wider House-wide inquiry.

“The committee’s findings indicate the need for a fundamental reassessment of federal support for postsecondary institutions that have failed to meet their obligations to protect Jewish students, faculty, and staff, and to maintain a safe and uninterrupted learning environment for all students,” the report says. saying.

‘McCarthyism is alive and well’

Although criticism of universities’ external actions has been common since campus unrest began on October 7, 2023, the report sheds new light on what was happening behind the scenes.

Some of the most notable findings include how university presidents reacted after being questioned at the Capitol.

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

Records show that she began her comments by acknowledging that she had not spoken out clearly against anti-Semitism. But Gay then quickly shifted focus to Rep. Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican and Harvard alum who sharply criticized the Harvard leader at the hearing. Gay said it was difficult to see the “moral core” of the university being questioned “especially by someone who is a purveyor of hate” and a “proud boys supporter.” (sic).

At Penn, then-Chairman Scott Bok told former University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill that Republican officials calling for Magill’s resignation were “very easy to buy.”

Lawmakers also cited a text message exchange between former Columbia University President Minouche Shafik and Board of Trustees Co-Chair Claire Shipman shortly afterward. Shafik hearing on April 17. Shipman wrote about how New York Times event coverage had “inoculated” Manhattan ivy from the same “capital” (sic) nonsense and threats from the hills” like Harvard.

(Magill and Homosexuals Both resigned shortly after the first hearing. Shafik also resignedbut five months passed between the hearing and its announcement.)

Republicans argue that these comments show how administrators were more concerned about public image than confronting anti-Semitism and had unruly hostility toward congressional oversight.

But for Edward Ahmed Mitchell, deputy national director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, there is a sense of sarcasm in these conclusions.

“The irony is that for years Republicans in Congress complained about federal involvement in the education system,” Ahmed Mitchell said. “Now, suddenly, they want a federal intrusion because they believe the federal government can be used as a weapon to force colleges and universities to silence university students and professors who defend Palestinian human rights.”

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

Fansmith believes there is certainly a federal role to play in ensuring the accountability of colleges and universities, noting that the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has opened more than 100 investigations into alleged violations of Title VI. But that supervision has limits.

“These efforts have less to do with true accountability or an appropriate response… and are more an effort to exert influence on campuses, to try to force them to move in directions that meet the political objectives of a group or another,” he said. saying.

Destroying Ivory Towers

Republicans and Jewish advocacy organizations applauded the committee’s efforts to hold universities accountable.

Kenneth Marcus, founder of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and former head of OCR during the Trump administration, said the report uses the power of the Congressional pulpit to amplify what Jewish organizations have been saying for years. .

“The central message,” he said, “is that many university administrators have been deliberately indifferent to the rise of anti-Semitism on their campuses.”

But what’s even more important than the committee’s language, Marcus added, are the documents themselves. The litigants will “study them carefully,” he said. About half of the report includes excerpts from documents compiled by the committee.

“Government investigators should do it too,” he said. “The documents are, at the very least, a public embarrassment for many universities and, perhaps worse, a potential source of liability.”

Stefanik said in a press release that the report shows the “moral bankruptcy” of “once ‘elite’ higher education institutions” and that they will suffer the consequences.

“These universities will face a reckoning in the coming decades that will shatter their ivory towers,” he said.

Meanwhile, a Northwestern University official said the report “ignores the hard work our community has done since (last spring’s hearing).” “We continue to add resources and expand educational opportunities consistent with our commitment to protecting our community while facilitating the productive exchange of ideas,” wrote Jon Yates, vice president of global marketing and communications. “The University objects to unfair characterizations of our chancellor and valued members of our faculty based on isolated and out-of-context communications (and) unequivocally stands behind them and their work on behalf of our students.”

Other colleges and universities mentioned in the report, including Harvard and the University of California, Los Angeles, generally declined to comment directly on the report, instead noting changes that have been made and will be made related to addressing anti-Semitism in the campus.

“Under the university’s new leadership, we have established a centralized Office of Institutional Equity to address all reports of discrimination and harassment, appointed a new Rules Administrator, and strengthened the capabilities of our Office of Public Safety,” a spokesperson for the university wrote. Columbia University in an email. . “We are committed to applying the rules fairly, consistently and efficiently.”

Within higher education He also contacted Rutgers University, MIT, and Penn, all of which participated in the hearings and were included in the report, but did not receive a response.