Congressional leaders grilled the presidents of three elite colleges, and a Jewish-studies-program director, for close to five hours on Tuesday, asking about what they called a wave of antisemitic incidents on campuses since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.
The U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce called for Elizabeth Magill, Sally Kornbluth, and Claudine Gay — the presidents of, respectively, the University of Pennsylvania, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University — to “answer for mishandling of antisemitic, violent protests” on their campuses, according to a committee press release.
Some lawmakers accused the administrators of refusing to hire conservative professors; of wrongly classifying hate speech and harassment of Jewish students as free speech; and of allowing diversity, equity, and inclusion officers to protect some minority students but not Jewish students, all actions they say have resulted in growing antisemitism.
Throughout the hearing, the presidents rebutted many of the accusations by saying they had no data to back them up, and that they were doing everything in their power to keep students safe. They pointed to increased security on campuses and new antisemitism committees, as well as other ways to foster dialogue.
During an especially contentious moment, Rep. Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, asked Gay whether phrases like “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and “globalize the intifada” are allowed at Harvard, and whether administrators would allow “a student calling for the mass murder of African Americans.”
I was focused on action that weekend. Not statements.
When Gay attempted to respond, Stefanik interrupted, saying that “intifada” is a call for “violent armed resistance against the State of Israel, including violence against civilians and the genocide of Jews.” Stefanik then questioned if the use of the term during protests was allowed under Harvard’s code of conduct.
Gay called the use of the term “hateful” and “at odds with the values of Harvard.”
But “we embrace a commitment to free expression and give a wide berth to free expression, even of views that are objectionable, outrageous, and offensive,” Gay continued.
Protests over the war at all three campuses, and their leaders’ clumsy responses, have made national headlines in recent weeks. The three presidents have also faced pressure from donors, critics, faculty members, and alumni to better support the Jewish students on their campuses. (Many students and professors have also called for better protection for Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian students, amid rising Islamophobia incidents).
At the start of Tuesday’s hearing, the committee screened a video of hundreds of pro-Palestinian students chanting pro-Palestinian slogans at campus protests, played over dramatic background music.
Many of the lawmakers shared stories of Jewish students feeling unsafe going to class or to the library, after reports of swastika drawings in campus buildings and Jewish students being singled out with verbal abuse. Some said the rise of antisemitism came from an “overwhelmingly liberal” culture among the administrators and the faculty.
When Magill said she believes in “a wide variety of perspectives,” within the professoriate, Rep. Joe Wilson, Republican of South Carolina, cut her off.
Wilson had asked each president the percentage of conservative faculty members at their college. When the presidents said they couldn’t provide the data because their colleges didn’t collect it, he countered: “This is so sadfully and shamefully revealing that there’s no diversity and inclusion of intellectual thought. And the result of that is antisemitism.”
Rep. Aaron Bean, a Florida Republican, grilled the administrators again, asking how many faculty have been fired, and student groups removed from campus, because of statements they’ve made about the war. None of the presidents responded to his question.
Rep. Mark Takano, a California Democrat, asked Gay why she didn’t react with a statement as quickly as did the leaders of other colleges after Hamas’s October 7 attacks. Gay said her first action immediately following the attack was to ensure the safety of any students who were in Israel at the time. She said she then went to a dinner at Hillel on October 8 to hear from Jewish students. She followed with a statement on October 9 condemning the militants’ attacks.
“I was focused on action that weekend,” Gay said later in the hearing amid continued criticism. “Not statements.”
Kornbluth also defended her response to a heated protest that involved shouting matches and the ripping of signs, and led to several student suspensions in early November. “When the protest started, I ordered a police presence to ensure safety, and we de-escalated when it was prudent,” Kornbluth responded. “In a very tense situation among students, we avoided altercations, and we kept everyone safe.”
Rep. Alma S. Adams, Democrat of North Carolina, asked the three college leaders whether their diversity, equity, and inclusion offices were equipped to fight antisemitism or hate on campus. All three said such offices were dedicated to protecting all students, regardless of their identities or religions.
Kornbluth added that understanding and combating antisemitism should go beyond the responsibility of DEI offices, and extend to the greater campus community.
“We can make as many top-down initiatives as we want,” Kornbluth said. “But the heartening thing is that the discussion of antisemitism, and indeed of Islamophobia, is now proceeding at a grass-roots level.”
Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, an Oregon Democrat, said conservative lawmakers used the hearing as a way to “attack higher education; liberal-arts education; and important diversity, equity, and inclusion work that’s happening at colleges and universities across the country.”
“There are legitimate concerns about antisemitism, and that’s what we should focus on today,” Bonamici continued.
The heartening thing is that the discussion of antisemitism, and indeed of Islamophobia, is now proceeding at a grass-roots level.
The congresswoman then directed a question to Pamela Nadell, director of the Jewish-studies program at American University and another witness in the hearing, about how to make campuses safe and inclusive while also adhering to the First Amendment.
Nadell emphasized the need to foster conversations in classrooms, while also supporting student organizations that provide safe places for Jewish students.
The leaders also identified what they’ve done on their campuses already, including creating task forces against antisemitism and Islamophobia, increasing security, improving mental-health resources for students, and updating and widely promoting ways to report hate incidents.
“I think it’s important to call out antisemitism in a very visible and public way, in a specific way in order to make clear that it’s contrary to the values of the institution,” Magill said.
Kornbluth added that administrators have to move beyond “formal training,” though, and foster “constructive and civil dialogue.” Students at MIT will be able to participate in roundtable discussions with one another, she said, and the faculty are working to bring students together through lunches and other conversations.
“These students are thrown together in classrooms and laboratories and dormitories every day. This is where the dialogue is taking place,” Kornbluth said.
Nadell, the American University Jewish-studies director, pointed to the University of California at Berkeley, where a professor of Middle Eastern language and cultures and a professor of Israel studies together sent out a letter calling for civil discourse. She also emphasized a forum at Dartmouth College where students communicated with one another and with faculty members.
“This is not a silver bullet,” she said. “We will not fix this overnight.”
The process will take time, Nadell said, and requires patience and constructive conversation from all sides.
