House Republicans were beaten elite private colleges and some flagship state universities for their handling of pro-Palestinian protests in a new report that claims anti-Semitism has swept college campuses and administrators have prioritized “terror sympathizers” over the Jewish community.

In the sting 325 page report released Thursday, the Republicans on 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 October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel.

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

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

Other higher education experts and lobbyists say the report demonstrates the harmonization of anti-Semitism and overlooks 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 capitalize on these painful divisions to interfere with, undermine, and delegitimize American higher education in the public mind,” American Association of University Professors President Todd Wolfson said in a statement to Inside the Upper Ed. “Government interference in higher education is a dangerous path, and this must be a moment of clarity for faculty, staff and students on our campuses.”

Led by Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, a Republican from North Carolina, the committee received more than 400,000 pages of documents as part of its wide-ranging investigation into the handling of protests, disciplinary actions and efforts to protect Jewish students, faculty and staff. Ultimately, the committee said it found university leaders had made “shocking concessions” to protesters; willfully refused to support Jewish students, faculty and staff; failed to impose meaningful discipline; and openly expressed his 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,” 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 did not find that the colleges violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin — and covers discrimination based on common ancestry, which includes anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Finding violations, however, is not up to Congress. namely under control of the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. Colleges that violate the law could eventually lose federal funds, though an unlikely outcome.

Still, the committee wrote that its findings show “a hostile environment for Jewish students that could violate Title VI” and chastised the Department of Education for not doing enough to hold colleges accountable. Ultimately, however, the committee said its findings did not amount to “conclusive judgments on violations.”

This investigation is one of several ongoing in the House. The report will feed into a wider inquiry across the House.

“The committee’s findings indicate the need for a fundamental reevaluation 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 said. said.

“McCarthyism Alive and Well”

While criticism of the universities’ external actions has been common since campus unrest first 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 college presidents reacted after being questioned on the Hill.

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

Recordings show she began her remarks by acknowledging her failure to speak out against anti-Semitism. But Gay quickly shifted his focus to Rep. Elise Stefanik, a Republican from New York and Harvard alumna, who slammed the Harvard leader at the hearing. Gay said it was difficult to watch the “moral core” of the university being called into question “especially by someone who is a purveyor of hate” and a “supporter of proud boys” (chic).

At Penn, then-board chairman Scott Bok told former University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill that the Republican officials who called for Magill’s resignation were “so easy to buy.”

Lawmakers also cited a text exchange between former Columbia University President Minouche Shafik 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 had “inoculated” Manhattan Ivy from the same “capital”. (chic) hillbilly and menace” like Harvard.

(Magill and Gay both resigned shortly after the first hearing. And Shafik resignedbut five months passed between the hearing and her announcement.)

Republicans argue that the comments show that the administrators were more concerned with public image than confronting anti-Semitism and were unabashedly hostile to congressional oversight.

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

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

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

Fansmith believes there is certainly a federal role to play 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 surveillance has limits.

“These efforts have less to do with real accountability or an adequate response … and (are) more of an effort to exert influence on campuses — to try to force them to move in directions that meet the goals of one group or another,” he said. said.

Cracking ivory towers

Republicans and Jewish advocacy organizations applauded the committee’s efforts to hold colleges 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 bully pulpit of Congress to amplify what Jewish organizations have been saying for years.

“The central message,” he said, “is that many college 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. Attorneys at law will “look into them,” he noted. About half of the report includes excerpts from documents collected by the committee.

“So should government investigators,” he said. “The documents are, at the very least, a public embarrassment for many colleges and, perhaps worse, a potential source of liability.”

Stefanik said inside 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 have a reckoning for decades to come that will shatter their ivory towers,” she said.

Meanwhile, a Northwestern University official 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 Jon Yates, vice president of global marketing and communications. “The university opposes unfair characterizations of our provost 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 named in the report, including Harvard and the University of California, Los Angeles, generally declined to comment directly on the report and instead pointed to changes they have made and will make to address anti-Semitism on 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 wrote Columbia University in an email. . “We are committed to applying the rules fairly, consistently and effectively.”

Inside the Upper Ed also reached out to Rutgers University, MIT and Penn — all of which were involved in the hearings and included in the report — but did not hear back.