[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                   HOLDING CAMPUS LEADERS ACCOUNTABLE
                      AND CONFRONTING ANTISEMITISM

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               Before The

                COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________


            HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, DECEMBER 5, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-31

                               __________

  Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce
  

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]  


        Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
        
                              __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
56-239 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------            
               COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE

               VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman

JOE WILSON, South Carolina           ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, 
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania             Virginia,
TIM WALBERG, Michigan                  Ranking Member
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin            RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,
JIM BANKS, Indiana                     Northern Mariana Islands
JAMES COMER, Kentucky                FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania          SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  MARK TAKANO, California
BOB GOOD, Virginia                   ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
LISA McCLAIN, Michigan               MARK DeSAULNIER, California
MARY MILLER, Illinois                DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
MICHELLE STEEL, California           PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
RON ESTES, Kansas                    SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana              LUCY McBATH, Georgia
KEVIN KILEY, California              JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
AARON BEAN, Florida                  ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
ERIC BURLISON, Missouri              HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas               TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico
JOHN JAMES, Michigan                 KATHY MANNING, North Carolina
LORI CHAVEZ-DeREMER, Oregon          FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York           JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana

                       Cyrus Artz, Staff Director
              Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
                                 ------                                
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on December 5, 2023.................................     1

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

    Foxx, Hon. Virginia, Chairwoman, Committee on Education and 
      the Workforce..............................................     1
        Prepared statement of....................................     4
    Scott, Hon. Robert C. ``Bobby'', Ranking Member, Committee on 
      Education and the Workforce................................     7
        Prepared statement of....................................     9

                               WITNESSES

    Gay, Dr. Claudine, President, Harvard University.............    13
        Prepared statement of....................................    15
    Magill, Elizabeth, President, University of Pennsylvania.....    20
        Prepared statement of....................................    22
    Nadell, Dr. Pamela, Professor of History and Jewish Studies, 
      American University........................................    26
        Prepared statement of....................................    28
    Kornbluth, Dr. Sally, President, Massachusetts Institute of 
      Technology.................................................    38
        Prepared statement of....................................    40

                         ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS

    Chairwoman Foxx:
        Letter from Talia Khan...................................   166
        Article from WSJ dated December 3, 2023..................   171
        Open Letter to American Colleges dated 2022 from 
          endjewhatred.com.......................................   175
    Ranking Member Scott:
        Letter dated December 4, 2023 from Council on American-
          Islamic Relations......................................   182
        Letter dated December 2, 2023 from MIT Jews for Ceasefire   186
        Letter dated December 2, 2023 from MIT Coalition Against 
          Apartheid..............................................   193
        Letter dated December 6, 2023 from Yad Vashem............   201
        Letter dated December 4, 2023 from MIT Jewish Alumni.....   202
        Testimony of Eboo Patel..................................   211
    Comer, James, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
      Kentucky:
        Report from the Network Contagion Research Institute.....   104
    Wilson, Hon. Frederica, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Florida:
        AJC Action Plan for Confronting Campus Antisemitism......    48

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Responses to questions submitted for the record by:
        Dr. Claudine Gay.........................................   216
        Dr. J. Larry Jameson.....................................   219

 
                   HOLDING CAMPUS LEADERS ACCOUNTABLE
                      AND CONFRONTING ANTISEMITISM

                              ----------                              


                       Tuesday, December 5, 2023

                  House of Representatives,
          Committee on Education and the Workforce,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:19 a.m., 2124 
Rayburn Building, Hon. Virginia A. Foxx [Chairwoman of the 
Committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Foxx, Wilson, Thompson, Walberg, 
Grothman, Stefanik, Allen, Banks, Comer, Owens, Good, McClain, 
Miller, Steel, Letlow, Kiley, Bean, Burlison, Moran, James, 
Chavez-DeRemer, Williams Houchin, Scott, Courtney, Wilson, 
Bonamici, Takano, Adams, DeSaulnier, Norcross, Jayapal, Wild, 
McBath, Hayes, Stevens, Leger Fernandez, Manning, and Bowman.
    Staff present: Cyrus Artz, Staff Director; Nick Barley, 
Deputy Communications Director, Mindy Barry, General Counsel; 
Hans Bjontegard, Legislative Assistant; Christina Delmont-
Small, Investigator; Isabel Foster, Press Assistant; Sheila 
Havenner, Director of Information Technology; Amy Raaf Jones, 
Director of Education and Human Services Policy; Georgie 
Littlefair, Clerk; Hannah Matesic, Deputy Staff Director; Audra 
McGeorge, Communications Director; Gabriella Pistone, Oversight 
Legislative Assistant; Rebecca Powell, Staff Assistant; Mary 
Christina Riley, Professional Staff Member; Chance Russell, 
Economist and Policy Advisor; David Samberg, Associate 
Investigative Counsel; Brad Thomas, Deputy Director of 
Education and Human Services Policy; Maura Williams, Director 
of Operations; Savoy Adams, Minority Intern; Amaris Benavidez, 
Minority Professional Staff; Nekea Brown, Minority Director of 
Operations; Ilana Brunner, Minority General Counsel; Kadia 
Diakite, Minority CBCF Fellow; Rashage Green, Minority Director 
of Education Policy; Christian Haines, Minority General 
Counsel; Eric Hale, Minority Grad Intern; Emanual Kimble, 
Minority Professional Staff; Stephanie Lalle, Minority 
Communications Director; Kristen Lemus, Minority Intern; 
Raiyana Malone, Minority Press Secretary; Olivia McDonald, 
Minority Staff Assistant; Kota Mizutani, Minority Deputy 
Communication Director; Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff 
Director; Clinton Spencer IV, Minority Staff Assistant; and 
Banyon Vassar, Minority IT Administrator.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Good morning. The Committee on Education 
and the Workforce will come to order. I note that a quorum is 
present. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to call a 
recess at any time. Before we begin, I would like to begin with 
a moment of silence to recognize all the Israelis and others 
who have been killed, injured or taken hostage by Hamas 
terrorists.
    Thank you. Today, each of you will have a chance to answer 
to and atone for the many specific instances of vitriolic hate-
filled antisemitism on your respective campuses that have 
denied students the safe learning environment they are due.
    As you confront our questions in this hearing remember that 
you are not speaking to us, but to the students on your campus 
who have been threatened and assaulted and who look to you to 
protect them.
    Several of those students are with us in this room, 
including Jonathan Frieden, who is the President of Alliance 
for Israel and a Harvard law student, Eyal Yakoby who is a 
student at UPenn, Talia Khan, who is the President of MIT 
Israel Alliance, and an MIT graduate student, Bella Ingber, who 
is Co-President of NYU Students Supporting Israel and a junior 
at New York University.
    Israel Ingber who is expected to start at the University of 
Chicago in the fall after taking a gap year to study in Israel, 
after being sent home right before the atrocities of October 
7th. Mya Cufer who is a freshman at UPenn and Liam Crez who is 
an American Israeli sophomore at UPenn.
    We have a short video that we will play now that shows what 
these students are facing.
    [Playing video.]
    Chairwoman Foxx. I want to do something which I rarely do, 
quote the Senate Majority Leader from New York, Chuck Schumer. 
On Wednesday, he took to the Senate floor to deliver an address 
on antisemitism stating, ``Many of the people who express these 
sentiments in America are not neo-Nazi's or card-carrying clan 
members, or Islamist extremists.
    There are many cases of people that most Liberal Jewish 
Americans felt previously were their ideological fellow 
travelers. Not long ago many of us marched together for black 
and brown lives.''
    You see this speech by the most powerful elected Jewish 
politician in America was addressed to many on his left flank. 
He questioned how these elements of the left, which pride 
themselves on diversity and inclusion, could be responsible for 
fomenting such hatred for liberal Jewish Americans.
    I quote Majority Leader Schumer to you, Presidents Gay, 
Magill and Kornbluth because I understand this speech to be a 
sort of reckoning for the Jewish identity with the radical 
left. For 40 minutes he fails to use the word university a 
single time. However, after the events of the past 2 months it 
is clear that rabid antisemitism in the university are two 
ideas that cannot be cleaved from one another.
    A prime example of this ideology at work is at Harvard, 
where classes are taught such as DP385, Race and Racism in the 
Making of the United States as a Global Power. The Harvard 
Global Health Institute hosts seminars such as ``Scientific 
Racism and Anti-Racism History and Recent Perspectives.'' Even 
the Harvard Divinity School has a page devoted to ``Social and 
Racial Justice.''
    Harvard also, not coincidentally but causally, was ground 
zero for antisemitism following October 7th, and is the single 
least tolerant school in the Nation according to the Foundation 
for Individual Rights and Expressions, 2024 College Free Speech 
Rankings.
    UPenn is right behind them at 247 of 248. MIT is in the 
middle of the pack. What I am describing is a grave danger 
inherent in assenting to the race-based ideology of the radical 
left. Senator Schumer has not put the pieces together, but the 
picture is far too clear now to American Jews.
    Institutional antisemitism and hate are among the poisoned 
fruits of your institutions' cultures. The buck for what has 
happened must stop on the President's desk, along with the 
responsibility for making it never again true on campus. Do you 
have the courage to truly confront and condemn the ideology 
driving antisemitism?
    Or will you offer weak, blame-shifting excuses in yet 
another responsibility dodging taskforce? That is ultimately 
the most important question for you to confront in this 
hearing. I will close with this. I appreciate your appearances 
today on behalf of Harvard, UPenn and MIT respectively. It 
proves your universities have at minimum, a sense of 
accountability to the American people.
    My praise for postsecondary education is very limited these 
days. Harvard, UPenn and MIT, you have a very big role to play 
in shaping the future for all of academia. This moment is an 
inflection point. It demands leaders of moral clarity, with the 
courage to delineate good from evil and right from wrong.
    With that, I look forward to each of your testimoneys. I 
yield to the Ranking member for an opening statement.
    [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Foxx follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Dr. Foxx, and thank our witnesses for 
appearing today. Historically college campuses have been hubs 
for students and faculty to foster intellectual thought and 
expression. Regrettably, following Hamas's October 7th attack 
on innocent civilians in Israel, with the ongoing conflict in 
Gaza, college campuses have become polarized, and we have been 
witnessing a disturbing rise in incidents of antisemitism and 
Islamophobia.
    To be clear, this discrimination is nothing new on college 
campuses. Indeed, nothing new in society generally. Any student 
of history knows that it did not start with the October 7th 
attacks, or any one new event, and it did not start with 
diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.
    My colleagues would do well to recall this country as a 
century's long history of racism and white supremacy. At the 
same time, free speech is a Constitutional right, the bedrock 
of our democracy in colleges and universities are often on the 
front lines of defending this right. Schools are also 
responsible for fostering campus environments that promote 
understanding, respectful dialog and above all else, student 
safety.
    Today we will hear from representatives at the universities 
on their efforts to protect students and address discrimination 
on campus. Of note, this is an opportunity that my republican 
colleagues denied us in 2017 when Committee democrats called 
for a hearing 6 years ago on campus discrimination when white 
supremacists marched through the University of Virginia grounds 
shouting, ``Jews will not replace us.''
    We could not get a hearing back then. While my colleagues 
to be committed to combating discrimination on campus, they are 
also contradictorily and simultaneously stoking culture wars 
that can be divisive and discriminatory. Moreover, House 
republicans are proposing significant cuts to the Department of 
Education's Office of Civil Rights, the very office responsible 
for upholding students' civil rights and investigating 
discrimination claims.
    You cannot have it both ways. You cannot call for action 
and then hamstring the agency charged with taking that action 
to protect student's civil rights. In stark contrast, the Biden 
administration has taken an active role in helping 
institutions, protect students as part of the White House's 
national strategy to combat antisemitism. Under President 
Biden's direction, the Department of Education has provided 
additional guidance to colleges and universities on how to 
uphold their obligation under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act 
of 1964, and better address antisemitism, Islamophobia, and all 
forms of discrimination on campus.
    They have also opened investigations into recent incidents 
on many campuses including Harvard, Columbia, Cornell, Wesley, 
University of Pennsylvania, University of Tampa, just to name a 
few. In closing, I want to echo my colleague, and I will quote 
Senator Schumer again.
    ``All Americans share a responsibility and an obligation to 
fight back whenever we see the rise of prejudice of any type in 
our midst.'' Today I hope my republican colleagues will 
denounce the culture wars that have distracted us from 
protecting many vulnerable students, and I hope we can stand 
behind the Biden's administration's critical work to ensure 
that every student and educator has access to a campus free of 
discrimination, harassment and violence. To that end, I yield 
back.
    [The prepared statement of Ranking Member Scott follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Scott. Pursuant to Rule 8-
C, all members who wish to insert written statements into the 
record may do so by submitting them to the Committee Clerk 
electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m., 14 days 
after the date of this hearing, which is December 19, 2023.
    Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 
14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous material 
referenced during the hearing to be submitted for the official 
hearing record.
    I now turn to the introduction of our witnesses. Our first 
witness is Dr. Claudine Gay who is the President of Harvard 
University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Our second witness is 
Ms. Liz Magill, who is the President of the University of 
Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
    Our next witness is Dr. Pamela Nadell, who is a Professor 
of History and Jewish Studies at American University in 
Washington, DC. Our final witness is Dr. Sally Kornbluth, who 
is President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
    I note Dr. Kornbluth will monitor her diabetes during the 
hearing. We thank you all for being here today and look forward 
to your testimony. I would like to remind the witnesses that we 
have read your written statements, which will appear in full in 
the hearing record.
    Pursuant to Committee Rule 8-D, and Committee practice, I 
ask that each of you limit your oral presentations to a 5-
minute summary of your written statement. I also would like to 
remind the witnesses to be aware of their responsibility to 
provide accurate information to the Committee.
    If we have a demonstration that gets unruly, we will ask 
the campus police to take people out immediately. I now 
recognize Dr. Gay for 5 minutes.

 STATEMENT OF DR. CLAUDINE GAY, PRESIDENT, HARVARD UNIVERSITY, 
                    CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

    Ms. Gay. Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member Scott, and 
distinguished members of the Committee. My name is Claudine 
Gay, and I am the President of Harvard University. It is an 
honor to be here today representing a community of more than 
25,000 undergraduate and graduate students, more than 19,000 
faculty and staff, and more than 400,000 alumni, including 
multiple members of this Committee.
    Thank you for calling this hearing on the critical topic of 
antisemitism. Our community still mourns those brutally 
murdered during the Hamas terrorist attack in Israel on October 
7th. Words fail in the face of such depravity. The deadliest, 
single day for the Jewish community since the horrors of the 
Holocaust.
    In the 2 months since the atrocities of October 7th, and 
the subsequent armed conflict and humanitarian crisis in Gaza, 
we have seen a dramatic and deeply concerning rise in 
antisemitism around the world, in the United States, and on our 
campuses, including my own.
    I know many in our Harvard Jewish community are hurting, 
and experiencing grief, fear, and trauma. I have heard from 
faculty, students, staff and alumni of incidents of 
intimidation and harassment. I have seen reckless and 
thoughtless rhetoric shared in person and online on campus and 
off. I have listened to leaders in our Jewish community who are 
scared and disillusioned.
    At the same time, I know members of Harvard's Muslim and 
Arab communities are also hurting. During these past months the 
world, our Nation and our campuses have also seen a rise of 
incidents of Islamophobia. During these difficult days I have 
felt the bonds of our community strain.
    In response I have sought to confront hate while preserving 
free expression. This is difficult work, and I know that I have 
not always gotten it right. The free exchange of ideas is the 
foundation upon which Harvard is built. Safety and well-being 
are the pre-requisites for engagement in our community.
    Without both of these things our teaching and research 
mission flounder. In the past 2 months our bedrock commitments 
have guided our efforts. We have increased security measures, 
expanded reporting channels, and augmented counseling, mental 
health and support services.
    We have reiterated that speech that incites violence, 
threatens safety, or violates Harvard's policies against 
bullying and harassment is unacceptable. We have made it clear 
that any behaviors that disrupt our teaching and research 
efforts will not be tolerated. Where these lines have been 
crossed, we have taken action.
    We have drawn on our academic expertise to create learning 
opportunities for our campus community. We have begun 
examinations of the ways in which antisemitism and other forms 
of hate manifest at Harvard, and in American society. We have 
also repeatedly made clear that we at Harvard reject 
antisemitism and denounce any trace of it on our campus or 
within our community.
    Antisemitism is a symptom of ignorance, and the cure for 
ignorance is knowledge. Harvard must model what it means to 
preserve free expression while combating prejudice and 
preserving the security of our community. We are undertaking 
that hard, long-term work with the attention and intensity it 
requires.
    Once again, I thank the Committee for the opportunity to 
discuss this important work. I have faith today that through 
thoughtful, focused and determined effort, we will once again 
meet adversity and grow. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Gay follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Dr. Gay. Ms. Magill, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.

     STATEMENT OF MS. LIZ MAGILL, PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF 
            PENNSYLVANIA, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

    Ms. Magill. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member 
Scott and distinguished members of this Committee for the 
opportunity to be here today. My name is Elizabeth Magill, and 
I am the President of the University of Pennsylvania. Let me 
begin by saying that I, and the University of Pennsylvania are 
horrified by, and condemn Hamas's abhorrent and brutal terror 
attack on Israel on October 7th.
    There is no justification, none, for those heinous attacks. 
The loss of life and suffering that are occurring in Israel and 
Gaza during the ensuing war are heartbreaking.
    This pain, sorrow and fear extends to our campus and to our 
city of Philadelphia. This hearing this morning takes place 
just 2 days after the Philadelphia community witnessed in 
horror the hateful words of protestors who marched the city and 
then near our campus.
    These protestors directly targeted a center city business 
that is Jewish and Israeli owned, a troubling and shameful act 
of antisemitism. Philadelphia Police and Penn Public Safety 
were present, and thankfully no one was injured, but these 
events have understandably left many in our community upset and 
afraid.
    Antisemitism, an old, viral and pernicious evil has been 
steadily rising in our society, and these world events have 
dramatically accelerated that surge. Few places have proven 
immune, including Philadelphia and campuses like ours. This is 
unacceptable. We are combating this hate on our campus with 
both immediate and comprehensive action.
    I have condemned antisemitism publicly, regularly, and in 
the strongest possible terms. Today, let me reiterate my and 
Penn's unyielding commitment to combating it. We immediately 
investigate any hateful act, cooperating with both law 
enforcement and the FBI where we have identified individuals 
who have committed these acts in violation of either policy or 
law.
    We initiate disciplinary proceedings and engage law 
enforcement. We have acted decisively to ensure safety 
throughout and near our campus, expanding the presence of 
public safety officers at our religious life centers and all 
across campus. On November 1st, just over a month ago, I 
announced Penn's action plan to combat antisemitism.
    This builds on our antihate efforts to date, and it is 
anchored firmly in the United States' national strategy to 
counter antisemitism. The plan centers on three key areas and 
has many elements. Those areas are safety and security, 
engagement and education.
    As part of this plan, I have convened and charged a task 
force to identify concrete actionable recommendations, 
directing them to provide me with the recommendations both in 
real time, and then a final report in a couple of months. To 
ensure that our Jewish students have a direct channel to share 
their experiences with me, I have created a Student Advisory 
Group on the student experience.
    Today's hearing is focused on antisemitism, and its direct 
impact on the Jewish community, but history teaches us that 
where antisemitism goes unchecked, other forms of hate spread 
and ultimately can threaten democracy. We are seeing a rise in 
our society in harassment, intimidation and threats toward 
individuals based on their identity as Muslim, Palestinian or 
Arab.
    At Penn, we are investigating all these allegations for 
members of our community, and providing resources to support 
individuals experiencing threats, online harassment and doxing, 
we will continue to deploy all the necessary resources to 
support any member of the community experiencing hate. As 
president, I am committed to a safe, secure, and supportive 
educational environment so that our academic mission can 
thrive. It is crucial that ideas are exchanged, and diverse 
viewpoints are debated. As a student of constitutional 
democracy, I know that we need both safety and free expression 
for universities and ultimately democracy to thrive. In these 
times these competing principles can be difficult to balance, 
but I am determined to get it right.
    We must get this right. The stakes are too high. Penn would 
not be what it is without its strong Jewish community past, 
present and future. I am proud of this tradition and deeply 
troubled when members of our Jewish community share that their 
sense of belonging has been shaken. Under my leadership we will 
never, ever shrink from our moral responsibility to combat 
antisemitism and educate all to recognize and reject hate.
    We will remain vigilant. I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Magill follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Ms. Magill. Dr. Nadell, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF DR. PAMELA NADELL, PROFESSOR OF HISTORY AND JEWISH 
         STUDIES, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D.C.

    Ms. Nadell. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx and Ranking Member 
Scott for inviting me today. I am Pamela Nadell, I am a 
Professor of Jewish History at American University, and I am 
currently writing the book, Antisemitism, an American 
Tradition, supported by a National Endowment for the Humanities 
Public Scholar Award, and I am delighted to be here today 
because this gives me an opportunity to thank Congress for 
sustaining through the NEH scholarship essential to 
understanding our Nation's past.
    This is the third time I have testified about this topic 
before Congress. The first was in 2017, just 3 months after 
white supremacists chanting ``Jews will not replace us,'' 
paraded through the University of Virginia, brandishing torch 
lights, echoing Nazi storm troopers strutting through Germany 
in the 1930's.
    I emphasize this because the antisemitism igniting on 
campuses today is not new. It is part of a long history of 
American antisemitism. While antisemitism is difficult to 
define, historical examples convey some of its contours. 
Antisemites believe that Jews have been corrupted by money 
since Judas betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver, and they've 
employed code names for avaricious Jews, Shylock, Rothschild, 
and in the 21st Century George Soros.
    Antisemites believe Jews conspired to destroy Christian 
western civilization. These conspiracy theories gained currency 
in the 1920's when Henry Ford's newspaper ran the series, The 
International Jew, the World's Foremost Problem. Today, the 
charge that the Jews are internationalists, have been replaced 
by the dog whistle globalist, implying that Jews are the puppet 
masters of the worldwide order.
    Across American history people from all walks of life have 
conveyed antisemitic ideas since 1654, when New Amsterdam 
Governor Peter Stuyvesant tried to expel, and I quote, ``This 
deceitful race, such hateful enemies and blasphemers of the 
name of Christ.''
    Now, more than 350 years later we have just marked the 
fifth anniversary of the murders at Pittsburgh's Tree of Life 
Synagogue. On city streets abuse is hurled at orthodox Jews, 
and Swastikas are graffitied on dorm doors, and also at the 
State Department. The long history of American antisemitism 
left its mark in higher education. Quotas on the admission of 
Jewish students began in the Ivy League in the 1920's and 
spread to more than 700 private colleges and universities.
    The campuses also wrestled with the challenge of 
antisemitic speech before this fall. In the early 1990's 
Holocaust deniers took out full page ads in college newspapers. 
Those ads launched furious debates about free speech on campus, 
and also helped propel Holocaust courses into the university to 
respond to the disinformation.
    Anti-Israel invective has been flaring on campus well 
before this fall. I could look back more than 20 years. In 
October 2000, 200 students at the University of Michigan 
yelled, ``Israel is a fascist state'', and protested a Hillel 
teaching. The barbarity of the Hamas terror of October 7th adds 
a terrible new chapter to Jewish history.
    Anyone who claims to care about human rights should 
denounce these horrors. That so many on campus not only did 
not, but that they justified the savagery in name of opposition 
to Israel has caused Jews around the world deep anguish. While 
I deplore all hateful speech, antisemitic speech remains in 
America protected. Free speech stands at the core of the 
liberal arts education, an education which almost every Member 
of Congress benefited from when they were students.
    Free speech does not permit harassment, discrimination, 
bias, threats, or violence in any form. When they occur our 
institutions, and not just the campus, but our Nation, they 
have in place mechanisms to respond. The American Jewish 
community has long strategized about how to reduce 
antisemitism.
    Their efforts received a stunning confirmation when the 
U.S. national strategy to counter antisemitism was published. I 
believe this is the first time any nation has developed such a 
document. I urge Congress to do everything in its power to 
support the national strategy, and also the forthcoming 
national strategy to counter Islamophobia. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Nadell follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Dr. Kornbluth, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.

  STATEMENT OF DR. SALLY KORNBLUTH, PRESIDENT, MASSACHUSETTS 
       INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

    Ms. Kornbluth. Thank you. Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking Member 
Scott, and distinguished members of the Committee. Thank you 
for this opportunity to describe how MIT is fighting the 
scourge of antisemitism. My name is Sally Kornbluth. I have 
been president of MIT since January of this year.
    As an American, as a Jew, and as a human being, I abhor 
antisemitism. My administration is combating it actively. Since 
October 7th my campus communications have been crystal clear 
about the dangers of antisemitism, and about the atrocity of 
the Hamas terror attack.
    Let me repeat what I said in my very first message to 
campus. In that video I said, ``The brutality perpetrated on 
innocent civilians in Israel by terrorists from Hamas is 
horrifying. In my opinion, such a deliberate attack on 
civilians can never be justified.''
    I also made clear that students were feeling unsafe because 
of their Jewish faith, or their ties to Israel and said, ``That 
should trouble every one of us deeply.'' I have reinforced this 
message, including in a November 14th campus video, as I said 
then, ``Antisemitism is real and it is rising in the world. We 
cannot let it poison our community.''
    I have been direct and unequivocal, and such leadership 
statements are important, but they must be paired with action. 
This is just what we are doing at MIT. Months before October 
7th, MIT joined the International Hillel Climate Campus 
Initiative which helps universities build awareness of and 
actions against antisemitism.
    We have launched an MIT wide effort called Standing 
Together Against Hate. It will emphasize both education and 
community building, especially in our residence halls. In 
addition to fighting antisemitism, it will address 
Islamophobia, also on the rise and also under reported. MIT 
will take on both, not lumped together, but with equal energy 
and in parallel.
    Importantly, as is clearly visible on campus, we have 
increased the police presence. Safety has been our primary 
concern. Nonetheless, I know some Israeli and Jewish students 
feel unsafe on campus. As they bear the horror of the Hamas 
attacks, and the history of antisemitism. These students have 
been pained by chance in recent demonstrations.
    I strongly believe that there is a difference between what 
we can say to each other, that is what we have a right to say, 
and what we should say, as members of one community. As 
President of MIT, in addition to my duties to keep the campus 
safe, and to maintain the functioning of this national asset, I 
must at the same time ensure that we protect speech and 
viewpoint diversity for everyone.
    This is in keeping with the institute's principles on free 
expression. Meeting those three goals is challenging, and the 
results can be terribly uncomfortable, but it is essential to 
how we operate in the United States. Those who want us to shut 
down protest language are in effect arguing for a speech code, 
but in practice, speech codes do not work.
    Problematic speech needs to be countered with other speech, 
and with education. We are doing that. However, the right to 
free speech does not extend to harassment, discrimination, or 
incitement to violence in our community. MIT policies are clear 
on this. To keep the campus functioning we also have policies 
to regulate the time, manner and place of demonstrations. 
Reports of student conduct that may violate our policies are 
handled through our faculty led Committee on Discipline.
    Our campus actions today have protected student's safety, 
minimized disruptions to campus activities, and protected the 
right to free expression. We are intensifying our central 
efforts to combat antisemitism, the vital subject of this 
hearing. I note that I am also deeply concerned about the rise 
in prejudice against Arabs, Muslims and Palestinians, 
nationally and in our community.
    We are determined to combat that as well. We are also 
supporting faculty, staff and student initiatives to counter 
hate. Thanks to an inspiring group of faculty members, we are 
seeing more discussion among students with conflicting views. 
We know there is further work to do, but we are seeing 
progress, and MIT's vital mission continues. Thank you. I am 
happy to answer questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Kornbluth follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Dr. Kornbluth. I will begin the 
questioning of our witnesses. I am going to ask members--before 
I ask my questions, let me do some housekeeping. Under 
Committee Rule 9, we will now question witnesses under the 5-
minute rule. I remind members that I will strictly enforce the 
5-minute rule, so members are advised to keep your questions 
succinct, so the witnesses have time to answer.
    Please do not talk for 4 minutes and then ask the witness a 
question. That--we have heard from many students that they do 
not feel safe. You have talked about that in your statements. 
The antisemitism we have seen on your campuses did not come out 
of nowhere. There are cultures at your institutions that foster 
it because you have faculty and students who hate Jews, hate 
Israel, and are comfortable apologizing for terror.
    How did your campuses get this way? What is it about the 
way that you hire faculty and approve curriculum that is 
allowing your campuses to be infected by this intellectual and 
moral rot? President Gay, I am going to ask you to give me a 
brief answer. I also would invite you to followup with more in 
writing, and we will followup with you, so I will go down the 
line, President Gay, then President Magill and President 
Kornbluth.
    Ms. Gay. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. Again, antisemitism 
has no place at Harvard. When we recruit faculty, we do so with 
the understanding that they are joining a community where we--
we honor, celebrate and nurture open discourse, both on the 
campus and in the classroom. To be a successful teacher and 
educator at Harvard, requires the ability to draw out all of 
the viewpoints and voices in your classroom, irrespective of 
one's political views.
    We devote significant resources to training our faculty in 
that pedagogical skill and to prioritizing that in our 
recruiting and hiring.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you.
    Ms. Magill.
    Ms. Magill. Thank you for the opportunity to address the 
question. I am troubled by what you are reporting about the 
culture of the institutions that we are leading, very contrary 
to the values that I hold as a leader of Pennsylvania--
University of Pennsylvania, as well as the institution where 
any form of hate is very contrary to our values.
    I would venture and answer, Chairwoman Foxx, that 
antisemitism has a role in the broader society, and that is 
what we are seeing happening in the society and on our 
campuses, and I am committed to combating it in immediate term 
and the long-term.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you.
    Dr. Kornbluth.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes. MIT is a majority STEM education and 
research institution, and we are devoted to solving the 
problems that face society. Our faculty hired for their 
brilliance, now we allow them to say what they would like in 
the classroom in the name of free expression, but we are 
committed to having them know that this is--that our campus 
must be a welcoming and inclusive environment.
    Although they may say what they like in the classroom 
academically, targeting any individual student, harassing, or 
discriminating is strictly forbidden in our classrooms and on 
campus.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. We will be following up with 
asking for specific plans for disciplining student and faculty 
who assault or harass students, or prevent them from accessing 
undisrupted classes, or campus spaces. We will be asking for 
your plan for preventing this rot from perpetuating how you're 
going to hire and assess instructors, how will you change and 
how you govern students, and what are the practical steps you 
will plan to take.
    I want to ask you one more question. It seems, as I have 
said, and Ms. Magill, I appreciate the fact that you feel 
concerned about my feeling about the fundamental culture on the 
campuses is foundational to this issue. Denial of the right of 
Israel to exist. I want to ask each one of you, President Gay, 
do you believe that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish 
nation?
    Ms. Gay. I agree that the State of Israel has the right to 
exist.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Ms. Magill, same question.
    Ms. Magill. I agree Chairwoman Foxx the State of Israel has 
the right to exist.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Dr. Kornbluth.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Absolutely, Israel has the right to exist.
    Chairwoman Foxx. I want to thank our witnesses again for 
being here, and to say we will followup, and to tell you that 
while we have talked about a larger culture out there, it is 
the universities who should be examples of what this Nation is 
all about. I yield back, and I recognize the distinguished 
Ranking Member who is wanting me to recognize Mr. Courtney.
    Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx, and I want to 
thank you for the moment of silence for the 137 hostages who 
are still being held to this day. We had a hearing a couple 
weeks ago on antisemitism where I shared with my colleagues and 
the witnesses that a dual US Israeli citizen with family in 
Waterford, Connecticut was one of those being held at the time, 
along--and we thought her husband--her name was Liat Beinin and 
Aviv Beinin. The good news is a week ago Liat was released, and 
unfortunately, a day later the Israeli military shared with the 
family that human remains which were found at the Kibbutz where 
the violent attack took place unfortunately matched up to Aviv.
    Again, Hamas never shared the information about whether or 
not they had him or not, which is just another example of their 
treachery. Dr. Nadell, in your testimony on page 8 you talked 
about President Biden's U.S. National Strategy to Counter 
Antisemitism, and particularly you talked about the use of 
Title VI of the U.S. Civil Rights Act in terms of being an 
effective tool on campuses to combat antisemitism. I was 
wondering whether you could talk about that a little bit.
    Ms. Nadell. Title VI allows for responding to some of the 
issues that the Presidents of these universities, but also 
frankly, of most universities around the Nation it seems at the 
moment have been dealing with in terms of when antisemitism 
moves into--moves beyond free speech, moves beyond rhetoric, 
and involves harassment or intimidation.
    The issue is that the Office of Civil Rights and the 
Department of Education needs to be fully funded in order to 
implement the U.S. Strategy to Counter Antisemitism. I just 
want to comment about the strategy because it is an 
extraordinary document. It has actions for the White House to 
carry out, or that division.
    It has issues for Congress to carry out, which I have a 
sense Congress has not been carrying out, and it also has major 
charges to hold society to respond to antisemitism, some of 
which we are hearing is already happening on the campuses. The 
problem is they do not make headlines because they are not a 
bunch of protestors.
    Mr. Courtney. Thank you, and again it is important to note 
that document was released back in May 2023. Certainly, before 
this committee, and the outrageous events of October 7th. The 
Ranking Member mentioned in his opening remarks that you know, 
at the same time that we are holding this hearing, we are also 
now still trying to get a budget passed for Fiscal Year 2024.
    The majority in the House reported out their budget, which 
as you mentioned, carried a cut for the Office of Civil Rights, 
to be more specific it is a 25 percent cut, 35 million dollars 
out of their rather small budget. 72 million dollars lower than 
what the President had asked for.
    I mean we had a witness here again 2 weeks ago who worked 
for almost 20 plus years at ADL, the Anti-Defamation League. 
They have been around for 110 years, fighting antisemitism in 
this country. Again, she talked about the fact that you know 
that type of cut is just going to cripple the ability of the 
antisemitism police, if you want to sort of look at it that 
way, in terms of trying to stop this type of activity on 
campuses.
    Again, I was just wondering if you had sort of what your 
view is of a cut in terms of the impact of the Office of Civil 
Rights to do its job.
    Ms. Nadell. I think the cut is absolutely devastating. What 
I would also remind everyone is that the Office of Civil Rights 
and the Department of Education does not only focus on 
antisemitism. It focuses on all forms of hate, and I would 
guess, I actually tried to find this information, but was 
unable to do so.
    I would guess that the majority of complaints are not 
coming from Jewish students, although maybe now since what 
happened on October 7th. I would guess the majority of the 
complaints are actually coming from people of color, and from 
others who have faced terrible bias. It is unthinkable, 
unconscionable to make that cut.
    Mr. Courtney. Talk is cheap. I mean I have been around here 
a while. Budgets are what really, I think show the true 
willingness to act in situations like this. I would just like 
to close by mentioning that in Connecticut a young, transfer 
student, international student from the West Bank, Tahseen 
Aliahmad, a sophomore at Trinity College, is a math major who 
was up visiting friends in Burlington, Vermont. They were 
walking from going bowling.
    This coward came out of this house with a firearm and at 
point blank range shot all three students who were absolutely--
they were going to their relative's house at the time. It shows 
again that the civil rights effort of the Department of 
Justice, which also is being subjected to a potential cut needs 
to get full funding in the Office of Civil Rights. With that, I 
would yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Courtney. I now recognize 
Congressman Wilson from South Carolina for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you. Thank you, Chairwoman Virginia Foxx. 
Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, I believe, appropriately began this 
hearing about how serious this is that the Iran puppets of 
Hamas have victimized the world, including here in the United 
States, and shockingly as we include people that have been 
affected, it should be Paul Kessler of California, who was 
murdered by a professor.
    A professor supporting Hamas as he was demonstrating 
peacefully on behalf of the people of Israel. We have victims 
right in our country of murder in California. With that in 
mind, I would say this respectfully to each of the university 
professors here today. Without any inclination, I would like 
the answer, and it should be a percentage of conservatives.
    That is you each rightfully promote diversity and inclusion 
of race and gender with percentages available. That is 
available at your universities. What is the percentage of 
conservative professors in your institutions? I only want to 
know the percent of conservatives. What is the number, 
President Gay?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you, Congressman. I cannot provide you that 
statistic because it is not data that we collect, but I will 
say that we--we try to draw our talent to Harvard from----
    Mr. Wilson. Okay. We have got to race ahead please. I do 
not want more. I just want to know what is the percentage of 
conservative professors at Harvard?
    Ms. Gay. I do not have that statistic. We do not collect 
that data.
    Mr. Wilson. That concerns me. President Magill, what is the 
percentage of conservative professors allowed to teach at your 
institution?
    Ms. Magill. Representative, I strongly believe in a wide 
variety of perspectives. We do not track that information, so I 
cannot give that to you.
    Mr. Wilson. Okay, no. None. I got the message. President 
Kornbluth, what is the percentage of conservative professors at 
MIT?
    Ms. Kornbluth. We do not document people's political views, 
but conservatives are welcome to teach on our campus.
    Mr. Wilson. I think this is so sadly and shamefully 
revealing that there is no diversity inclusion of intellectual 
thought. The result of that is antisemitism, and you can study 
with government money all you want to, Doctor, but it is due to 
illiberalism that has taken over the country, and you might 
look into that when you get your next government grant.
    With that in mind, the barbaric mass murder on October 7th 
by Iran puppets, Hamas, invading Israel trained by war criminal 
Putin, has shockingly revealed that many college campuses are 
sickeningly antisemitic. This is defending the maniacal Hamas 
agenda. The Hamas agenda is in their covenant of August 1988.
    I hope you read it because it says in Article VII, I will 
take you, you do not have to read the whole thing--``Kill the 
Jews.'' What that means is death to Israel, death to America. 
To have that percentage is disgusting. Sadly, college campuses 
have descended from coveted citadels intellectual freedom to 
illiberal sewers of intolerance and bigotry.
    Diversity and inclusion are a George Orwell 1984 
implementation as we see in excluding conservative thought. The 
solution for closed minded intolerance on campuses is obvious. 
To liberate academia from denial of free speech, respecting the 
First Amendment.
    There should be diversity inclusion of more conservative 
academics overcoming today's blatant discrimination. With that 
in mind, Dr. Magill, I have received questions from really 
wonderful students at the University of Pennsylvania who were 
in a State of shock about the State of the university.
    You say the university has introduced a plan to combat 
antisemitism, yet we hear of more incitement and intimidation 
of Jewish students at Penn. Do you understand that having 
policies means nothing if you don't implement them? How many 
students or faculty have been removed or discipled under your 
policies?
    What is the average time for action on student conduct, or 
other policies to conclude and you can get this back to me 
later. What are you enforcing? At a pro-Hamas Penn protest 
President Huda Fakhreddine and faculty member Ahmad Almallah 
was seen enthusiastically clapping in support of the speaker as 
they shouted, ``Go back to Moscow, Brooklyn, blanking Berlin 
where you came from.''
    Has any action been taken to address Professor Fakhreddine 
and Professor Ahmad Almallah's support of this inciteful and 
intimidating speech? How are Jewish students in 
Fakhreddine'sclasses supposed to receive fair treatment when 
she endorses hatred? I should have said, and also, I am going 
to conclude by another question. How in the world can you all 
now have a class on resistance literature from pre-Islamic 
Arabia featuring a person who is with the terrorist 
organization PFLF? We will present this to you. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Foxx. We go from Mr. Wilson from South Carolina 
to Ms. Wilson from Florida.
    Mrs. Wilson. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Foxx, and 
Ranking Member Scott. Thank you to the witnesses for your 
testimoneys today. As the witnesses have shared, antisemitism 
anywhere is abhorrent and unacceptable, and must be condemned.
    I am privileged to represent a strong united Jewish 
community in South Florida. My next-door neighbor is a Rabbi. 
My Jewish constituents have experienced everything from bomb 
threats on Jewish centers, schools, to harassment of Jewish 
community members.
    I stand with them. We talk often. We commiserate and we 
pray. We must take a stand against all forms of hate, whether 
that be antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism, xenophobia and 
terrorism. This must stop. In Congress, for 7 years I led the 
fight against Boko Haram, a terrorist group that kidnapped over 
300 schoolgirls in Nigeria.
    Gang rapes, beheadings, killing whole families, so I am 
particularly sensitive to this issue of terrorists and what 
they do. Disagreements about the conflict in the Middle East 
should never escalate to threats of violence against any 
community. We are a civilized society. We must draw a line and 
condemn hate. Please know that in May the Biden administration, 
Biden Harris administration, introduced the U.S. National 
Strategy to Counter Antisemitism. A comprehensive approach 
addressing antisemitism in diverse environments, including 
college campuses.
    With that, I have a few questions. Ms. Nadell, based on 
your knowledge from 2016 to 2020, what has been the United 
States response to antisemitic events? Specifically thinking 
about Charlottesville, Unite the Right, and what the Trump 
Pence administration did compared to this administration.
    Ms. Nadell.
    Ms. Nadell. The Unite the Right Rally at the University of 
Virginia and in Charlottesville, Virginia in August 2017 was 
for me, and I believe actually for the majority of American 
Jews, a major turning point. It signaled that the long history 
of antisemitism in the United States that it was about to burst 
out again.
    For the first time ever that I know of, Jews who were 
worshiping in their synagogue on Saturday morning, and they 
watched some of those United the Right rally'ers parade past 
the synagogue armed, and they had to sneak out of the back of 
the synagogue because they were afraid that violence would 
break out.
    What we are seeing in terms of the antisemitism in this 
moment in time is that it has been rising, and rising since 
2016, and although President Trump called the people who were 
the protestors and counter protestors said there were very good 
people on both sides, I disagree. I do not think there were 
very good people on both sides in Charlottesville in August 
2017.
    Mrs. Wilson. Okay. As I reflected, Professor Nadell, on the 
horrific events in the Middle east and the subsequent fallout 
on college campuses. I have been in contact with my friend and 
former congressional colleague Ted Deutch, who now heads the 
American Jewish Committee. The committee is the author of the 
AJC Action Plan and Toolkit for University Administrators.
    One of the recommendations that the university 
administrators recenter the conversation about the Middle East 
back to a place of fact-based exchange. Could you comment on 
why this suggestion is important, and I would like to, Madam 
Chair, enter this report into the record.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Without objection.
    [The information of Mrs. Wilson follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Nadell. This action is important because the campuses 
where faculty who come from Middle East studies, and faculty 
who come from Jewish studies have long been in conversation, 
not just since October 7th. Those are the places where the--
what we do in the university has been manifested in the best 
way. I am thinking for example of Dartmouth University where 
they held a forum, and they had their second forum 300 people 
in the room and they had 5,000 people online. Our universities 
not only educate our students today, but we can educate the 
wider public, and so I very much agree, admire, Ted Deutch, and 
I admire the American Jewish community for what they are trying 
to do. This is not a magic bullet. It is not going to be fixed 
overnight, but we are in the process of working on it, and 
hopefully tamping down antisemitism in America once again.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Your time has expired.
    Mrs. Wilson. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Mr. Thompson, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Madam Chair, for calling this 
important hearing. Thanks today to all of our folks that are 
testifying. As we have all seen recently there's been a sharp 
rise in antisemitic words, actions and attacks online, around 
the world, and unfortunately right here at home.
    Nowhere in the United States have these hateful and 
divisive ideas been more prevalent or have found a safer home 
than on college campuses. It is up to all of us to call out 
these actions and protect Jewish faculty students, staff at 
these institutions. Unfortunately, many of our university 
leaders have not met this moment and have allowed antisemitism 
to continue to grow and to rear its ugly head.
    President Magill, does the University of Pennsylvania have 
in place any policies to ensure that each student who has 
enrolled at the university, receives information on the history 
of antisemitism, how antisemitism presents itself, and actions 
students can take to prevent and report antisemitic behavior, 
and you know, why or why not?
    Ms. Magill. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss that. 
We are in the midst of making certain that all anti-bigotry 
efforts ensure education about antisemitism. We committed to 
that in September, and we are working through that. We have 
added education, some parts of our program do, and some parts 
of our program need to be enhanced, so we are working on that 
right now. I assure you that we will make certain that is 
included in all of our anti-bigotry efforts, antisemitism.
    Mr. Thompson. That is much appreciated. I wondered if that 
type of education would have been in place at all of our 
college campuses before this, whether we would have seen the 
massive reactions that we have that are just hard to describe 
and justify in terms of the demonstrations and just the hate.
    As part of the recent protests on and around campus there 
have been dozens of arrests made by university police, 
including several related terroristic threats. Does university 
plan on requiring students, faculty or staff arrested as part 
of these protests to receive further education on antisemitic 
behavior?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, is that a question for me?
    Mr. Thompson. It is. Yes, I am sorry. Please.
    Ms. Magill. Well, we are very committed to making sure 
everyone understands history and antisemitism for sure. The 
description of the arrests I need to learn a little bit more 
about.
    Mr. Thompson. Well, the requests that have occurred 
obviously related to protests involving faculty or staff, 
students--the question is, within the consequences when 
university police are the ones that are intervening, whether 
there are any thoughts to further education for those 
individuals on regarding antisemitic behavior and the impacts 
of it?
    Ms. Magill. It is certainly consistent with my perspective 
and my values and the institution's values. I wonder if I can 
followup with your team about the specifics of these arrests 
because they are--I am not--I do not know exactly what you are 
speaking about, but I agree with you that anyone who was 
arrested for an activity that was antisemitic, some act or 
something else, harassment, intimidation, should certainly 
receive education in addition to other consequences in my 
opinion.
    Mr. Thompson. Sure. Some criminal activity they were 
arrested for that was obviously driven by antisemitic beliefs 
and expressions. Several faculty members at Penn recently 
provided support for the boycott, divestment and sanctions for 
the BDS movement. The movement requires boycotting Israeli 
universities, and individuals who are complicit in what they 
consider Israeli government misconduct.
    Therefore, it is impossible for a faculty member to support 
BDS and treat Israeli academics fairly. Can you tell this 
Committee unequivocally that no such discrimination has taken 
place?
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify a very 
clear position that the University of Pennsylvania has had for 
many years, which is we strongly oppose boycotting, divesting 
and sanctioning Israel. We have many flourishing academic--it 
is contrary to academic freedom among other things. It is 
singling out one State and treating it differently than others.
    We have many academic collaborations with universities in 
Israel. We--they are terrific collaborations. We have 
absolutely--we are very clear on BDS. We are opposed to it, and 
our practices make that clear.
    Mr. Thompson. As a part of that, and I am a strong 
supporter of the right to free speech, including on college 
campuses. Does University of Pennsylvania have any policies or 
procedures in place to ensure that BDS supporters cannot 
implement their boycott positions in their official capacities 
for not giving such individuals administrative powers to begin 
with?
    Ms. Magill. Well, it is the position of the institution 
that we do not engage in boycotting, sanctioning or divesting, 
and I would think that would follow for any member of the 
organization who is acting in their official capacity. If you 
have specifics that I could followup on after this hearing, I 
would very much like to hear them.
    Mr. Thompson. We do. We will do that, appreciate. Thank 
you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Ms. Bonamici, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the 
witnesses. I appreciate the full Committee's focus on this 
issue. I want to reiterate, as I did in the other hearing we 
had recently, that antisemitism, as well as Islamophobia, and 
other forms of bigotry based on race, ethnicity and national 
origin or religion are abhorrent and must not be tolerated.
    I am deeply troubled by recent antisemitic incidents at 
colleges and universities across the country, including those 
whose presidents are here today, and I stand with my colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle in calling for proactive steps from 
all of these universities and high institutions to root out 
discrimination, hatred and bigotry in all of its forms.
    I also want to note that the main point of this hearing 
should be to identify bipartisan solutions to combat 
antisemitism, not an excuse to attack a higher education, 
liberal arts education, or important diversity, equity and 
inclusion work that's happening at colleges and universities 
across the country. There are legitimate concerns about 
antisemitism on college campuses, and that's what we should 
focus on today. Not doing so is a disservice to the students 
across the country who are looking to Congress for support, and 
the public for the institutions.
    During the previous hearing, I highlighted my support for 
additional funding for the Department of Education's Office for 
Civil Rights, and I want to join Representative Courtney in 
repeating that request today. OCR will be better able to 
enforce Title VI violations and protect students' civil rights 
with adequate staff and investigatory capacities, so I want to 
make that clear. We must do that.
    Dr. Nadell, thank you for being here and for your work over 
the years. Public colleges and universities as we know must 
uphold Constitutional free speech rights, and many private 
institutions also recognize the value of free speech and robust 
debate, and all of our Presidents recognize that today.
    With the understanding that schools cannot allow their 
campuses to become places where antisemitic speech makes 
students unsafe or feel unsafe. I think that is recognized. Dr. 
Nadell, what are some of the best ways that colleges and 
universities can work to make their campuses welcome, safe and 
inclusive spaces for all students in light of incidents of hate 
speech and discrimination, while also adhering to First 
Amendment principles?
    Ms. Nadell. Thank you for the question. I think there are 
different forms and different venues for expanding this 
discussion of the very difficult issue that has sparked and 
ignited the antisemitism, or the outbursts on college campuses 
that we have been seeing since October 7th.
    One form obviously is the classroom. Although, I would 
remind the members of the Committee that the reality is that 
most students during their college career they take a handful 
of courses. Many of them are studying STEM and most of them are 
actually never in classrooms where they are hearing a 
discussion of issues like antisemitism, or the conflict in 
Israel and Palestine.
    That is the first thing that I would point out. Academics, 
we academics can continue to foster those conversations. We 
need to take them outside of the classroom. I think the other 
place where there can really be a lot of work done where it is 
very successful is on the side of student life on campus.
    Student organizations are they range broadly and widely on 
the campus, everything from a gardening club, to obviously some 
of the student organizations that have been involved in the 
protests against Israel. These are other places.
    Ms. Bonamici. Dr. Nadell, I do not want to cut you off, but 
I have to get another question in, and I am running out of 
time.
    Ms. Nadell. Yes, oh sure.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you for your work, and I also want to 
recognize as well the AJC action plan for confronting campus 
antisemitism. President Gay, I understand that there is an 
ongoing investigation of your institution by OCR because of 
antisemitic incidents that occurred on campus.
    I know we will be closely monitoring the outcome, but in 
the interim, and over the long-term, what can Congress do to 
support your institution and other colleges in preventing 
discrimination? If you could respond in the brief time. You 
mentioned that Harvard will not permit speech that incites 
violence or threatens safety, and I would like you also to 
address who decides that and how and in what timeframe.
    Ms. Gay. Thank you, Congresswoman, for your questions. You 
are correct that there is an ongoing investigation and 
obviously I cannot comment on an active investigation other 
than to say we will work with the office to answer all of their 
questions. I will say the work of the office is vitally 
important for ensuring students have access to educational 
opportunities.
    I fully support the work they do and hope that the office 
gets the resources that it needs to be effective. With respect 
to I believe the question was about student conduct. Again, we 
are deeply committed to free expression, but when speech 
crosses over into conduct that violates our policies, policies 
against bullying, harassment, intimidation, we do take action.
    We do have faculty led student disciplinary processes that 
are quite robust. Even over the last couple of months as there 
have been incidents, we have been leaning into those processes, 
and we do have disciplinary actions underway.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. My time has expired. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. I now recognize 
Mr. Walberg for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to the panel 
for being here. These are difficult times and difficult 
subjects, but they need to be addressed because leadership 
matters, and you are leaders in academia at your institutions 
as well, and leadership matters.
    President Gay, I was taken by some words in your opening 
statement where you said the cure for antisemitism is 
knowledge. I would go where angels fear to tread and suggest 
that it might be better going back to the original motto idea 
for Harvard, which was veritas. Truth. That the cure for 
antisemitism is not simply knowledge.
    It is truth. Knowledge puffs up. Knowledge sometimes is 
based upon falsehoods. I think that is what we are facing right 
now. In the climate on campuses, is that we are missing the 
fact of truth, and allowing under the guise of free speech 
knowledge that is not true, to be exhibited in actions as well.
    President Gay in the week since October 7th, and again in 
your testimony you have said that Harvard's commitment to free 
speech extends to views that are objectionable or outrageous. 
Are you aware that Harvard is ranked dead last on the 2024 
Foundation of Individual Rights and Expressions Scorecard of 
Universities on freedom of speech?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. 
Respectfully, I disagree with that perspective as represented 
in the report that you cited. I do not think it is an accurate 
representation of how Harvard treats speech on campus. We are 
committed to free expression, and to making space for a wide 
range of views and perspectives on our campus. This is--this is 
bedrock.
    Mr. Thompson. With all due respect, let me move on a bit. I 
would expect that you would not agree with that. I understand 
that, and I would expect that the University of Penn the same 
would be true, that you would not agree that you are second to 
last on that same scorecard.
    President Gay, did you know that 70 percent of Harvard 
students say that shouting down of speakers is acceptable?
    Ms. Gay. That is not okay.
    Mr. Thompson. I appreciate that. It seems that perhaps 
Harvard's commitment to free speech is pretty selective. As you 
are no doubt aware, prominent alumnus Bill Ackerman tweeted you 
a letter on Sunday, and in that letter and I have that tweet. I 
guess that is the beauty of social media, you can get those 
things.
    In that letter he highlighted two cases of Harvard faculty 
members who are canceled because of views deemed too 
controversial for your campus. Tyler J. VanderWeele was deemed 
guilty for those crimes related to his views on marriage and 
abortion.
    Then Carole Hooven, an evolutionary biologist was forced to 
resign because she stated that a person's sex is biological and 
binary. Mr. Ackerman's letter also included quotes from a 
number of faculty, highlighting the culture of fear that 
pervades Harvard's campus for those with views out of step with 
campus orthodoxy.
    President Gay, in what world is a call for violence against 
Jews protected speech, but a belief that sex is biological, and 
binary is it not?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for your question. From the moment that 
our students arrive on campus, whether it is to begin their 
Harvard journey as an undergraduate, or at one of the 
professional schools, the message to them is clear. That we are 
an inclusive community, but one deeply committed to free 
expression.
    That means that we have expectations that that right is 
exercised mindfully and with empathy toward others. We 
reinforce that during their time at Harvard by helping them 
build the skills that allow them to engage in constructive 
dialog, even on the most complex and divisive issues. What we 
seek is not simply free expression, but the reason dialog that 
leads to truth and discovery, and that does the work of moving 
us all forward.
    We do not always get it right, and our students do not 
always get it right.
    Mr. Thompson. You are professors.
    Ms. Gay. When they transgress, they are held accountable.
    Mr. Thompson. Your professors come under that as well do 
they not? Your professors come under that as well?
    Ms. Gay. Absolutely.
    Mr. Thompson. For Professor VanderWeele and Hooven, that 
did not work for them. The free expression of views at the very 
least, views, whether fact or truth, I guess we will leave that 
to understanding. Nonetheless, they were removed from their 
positions. I think that sends a message. A message in this case 
with Jewish students that they're of less importance. I yield 
back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Mr. Takano, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to our 
witnesses for being here. I do wish we could meet under 
different circumstances. President Gay, many individuals hold 
that Harvard did not condemn the attack against Israel swiftly 
enough. I would like to give you an opportunity to briefly to 
react.
    Can you tell us why the university did not react as quickly 
as other universities might have, or others might have hoped 
Harvard would have?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. 
Respectfully, the notion that Harvard did not react is not 
correct. From the moment I learned of the attacks on October 
7th, I was focused on action to ensure that our students were 
supported and safe. On that first day we were focused on 
identifying whether we had any students or faculty who were in 
Israel and needed our assistance, including in getting out.
    On October 8th I joined students and other members of the 
community at Harvard Hillel, for a solidarity dinner to be 
there in support and also to learn more what their needs were. 
In the days after not only did I condemn the attacks, I have 
continued to condemn the attacks, and furthermore have 
continued to stay in conversation with our Jewish Community on 
Campus about their evolving needs, so that to ensure that the 
university is providing them with the support that they need 
during this very challenging time.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you, President Gay. Do you consider 
yourself a subject matter expert on antisemitic behavior?
    Ms. Gay. Excuse me, could you repeat that question? I did 
not hear.
    Mr. Takano. Do you consider yourself an expert on 
antisemitic behavior, subject matter expert?
    Ms. Gay. No. I do not. I know this, that antisemitism is 
hate or suspicion of Jews, and that is all I need to know to 
take action to address it on our campus.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you. Real quickly, other than Professor 
Nadell, do the other witnesses consider themselves to be 
experts on antisemitism? Just a simple yes, or no?
    Ms. Kornbluth. No, I do not.
    Ms. Magill. No, I do not, but I learn.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you. Well, my point is that this is the 
second legislative hearing on this topic in a month, and the 
majority has failed to bring forth any witnesses who can speak 
on how to address this issue, and how to take concrete steps to 
combat antisemitism.
    President Gay, it is my understanding that you have 
communicated to the Harvard community some of the specific 
steps you are implementing to combat antisemitism and continue 
to foster student and community engagement. You have already 
mentioned a few of the things that you have done since 
September 8th, but can you highlight some of these steps?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for the question. I had repeated 
communications with the campus community about the steps that 
we are taking, both immediate steps and longer-term action 
toward combating antisemitism. To begin, we have focused on 
enhancing the physical safety of the campus and the campus 
community.
    That includes an increased police presence, both plain 
clothes and uniformed officers, 24/7 threat monitoring, both on 
campus and online, coordination on a daily basis with State, 
local and Federal law enforcement, and when necessary, we have 
taken the steps of closing the gates to Harvard Yard, to limit 
the ability of outside actors to use our campus as a platform.
    We have also made it easier for students, or any community 
member to report concerns and any kind of conduct that is 
threatening. We have also enhanced counseling and mental health 
services, including trauma informed care. We have created 
community spaces so that students and faculty and staff can 
gather and to be together to process the tragedy. We are also 
working on----
    Mr. Takano. Excuse me, President Gay. Thank you. Are these 
actions only intended to assist Jewish students?
    Ms. Gay. These are resources that we are making broadly 
available to our community, but we are being particularly 
mindful to make sure that they are responsive to the needs of 
our Jewish community, as well as our Muslim, Arab and 
Palestinian students who are also experiencing tremendous grief 
and are also fearful and distraught during this time.
    Mr. Takano. President Gay, universities stand as centers of 
thought, and it is of the utmost importance to strike a balance 
between First Amendment speech protections and the safety of 
students and faculty. When speech crosses into the line of 
conduct--crosses the line into conduct, it is essential that 
universities act swiftly.
    Harvard is a private university and private IHEs have 
different parameters to operate under than public IHEs. Does 
this give Harvard a pass to avoid protecting free speech?
    Ms. Gay. We are deeply committed to protecting free 
expression, even of views that we find objectionable and 
outrageous and offensive. When that expression crosses into 
conduct that violates our policies around bullying, harassment, 
intimidation, threats, we take action, and we do not hesitate 
to take action.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you. My time is up, and I yield back to 
the Chair, thank you.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Takano. Mr. Grothman, you 
are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. I am going to followup on some of 
the things Mr. Wilson had to say. Just playing around here a 
little bit on the internet, in 2016 they found about 2 percent 
of the faculty of Harvard were viewed--President Trump, I 
think, is okay or good.
    I think in the 2020 election the Crimson, your local paper 
there, found 1 percent of the students voting for Donald Trump, 
which given the nationwide is about 50/50 was kind of shocking. 
Does it concern you at all that you apparently have a great 
deal, a lack of ideological diversity at Harvard, and do you 
think that atmosphere is maybe one of the reasons why there 
seems to be such an outbreak of antisemitism at your 
institution?
    Ms. Gay. Is that--is that question for me?
    Mr. Grothman. It is a question for you, and I will ask what 
are you going to do about it? Do you think it is a concern?
    Ms. Gay. We--so, we strive to have as diverse a faculty as 
we can because we want to make sure that we are sampling from 
the broadest pool of talent available in the world. That is how 
we ensure academic excellence. We then----
    Mr. Grothman. I--I, from what I have read here, maybe they 
are just making stuff up, but I do not think they are making it 
up. We said 2 percent of your faculty viewed Donald Trump as 
something rather poor in 2016, and after 4 years of working for 
diversity, 1 percent voted for him.
    Now I know all sorts of good people who do not like 
President Trump. I am just saying when you compare the way 
people think at your campus compared to America as a whole, if 
there is one thing you are, it is not diverse, right? Do you 
consider that a problem, or to the numbers I gave you?
    Ms. Gay. Congressman, I cannot speak to the specific data 
that you are referring to. What I can say is that at Harvard we 
try to create as much space as possible for a wide range of 
views and perspectives because we believe that allows for a 
thriving, academic community.
    Mr. Grothman. How in the world is that even possible that 
you are trying to do that? Do you really feel that your faculty 
are ideologically diverse? You came out of what was it, a 
political science background at Stanford?
    Ms. Gay. At Standford, as an undergraduate, I was an 
economics major, and then for my Ph.D. was a Ph.D. in political 
science.
    Mr. Grothman. Political science. That is what I thought. 
Did you experience what you would say given America's divided 
now 50/50 about 50/50 or was it 75/25 or 90/10 regarding to 
more Constitutional conservative perspective, or more of a 
left-wing perspective? What is your experience both at Harvard 
and Stanford?
    Ms. Gay. Here is what I can say on the topic that you are 
exploring. It is we want the most brilliant, talented faculty 
to come to Harvard, and to build their careers there. Then----
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. They are only giving me five--you are 
not going to answer the question--they are only giving me 5 
minutes. Is it common at Harvard to ask faculty to submit a 
diversity statement?
    Ms. Gay. That is a practice that varies across schools at 
Harvard.
    Mr. Grothman. Sometimes you do?
    Ms. Gay. In some cases, there are schools that ask for 
that.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. Could a scientist ever get cut from 
consideration from a job because they had the wrong view of 
diversity?
    Ms. Gay. What I would say is that we aim to draw to our 
faculty the broadest pool of talent.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay, I will put it this way, when you hear 
that, and this is not the way I wanted this to go, but when you 
hear that 1 percent of your faculty voted for a Presidential 
candidate who got about 50 percent of the vote nationwide, does 
that concern you, or do you feel you are not as diverse as you 
should be?
    Ms. Gay. What I am focused on is making sure that we are 
bringing the most academically talented faculty to our campus, 
and that they are effective in the classroom.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. I will give you one more question 
because I want to go to the gal from Penn. Has Harvard ever 
made a faculty job contingent on a strong diversity statement?
    Ms. Gay. We look at everything a faculty member will bring 
to our campus. Academic brilliance, and excitement and ability 
to teach a campus community and student community as diverse--
--
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. Now I want to go Ms. Magill. I have a 
friend whose son goes to University of Pennsylvania. Right now, 
he is physically afraid to go to the library at night, okay, 
just unbelievable. Could you--and I just cannot even conceive 
that it is going on in the United States of America, but that 
is what she tells me, and she does not make it up.
    Could you give us your reasons as to why that is true in 
Pennsylvania? Why today a Jewish student is afraid to walk to 
the library at night?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, let me start by saying I am 
devastated to hear that, and the safety and security of our 
campus and our students in particular is my top concern. I 
would, if you would be willing, I would like to talk to your 
constituent and their Penn student. I am very troubled by what 
you are reporting. It is our top priority to keep our students 
safe and secure.
    Chairwoman Foxx. I am going to have to ask you to followup 
on that with Mr. Grothman, and with the rest of the Committee. 
Ms. Adams, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you 
to the witnesses for coming today and to testify before the 
Committee. Before I get started, I want to just thank you for 
your service to students and to the university community. Dr. 
Nadell, this question is for you.
    I am glad, first of all, to see another Buckeye here, Ohio 
State, but as a former professor at a small college in North 
Carolina, Bennett College for over 40 years I taught there, I 
am deeply disappointed by the rise of antisemitism rhetoric 
that is happening across the country.
    Antisemitism has no place on our college campuses, or 
anywhere, and it has been my mission to combat instances of 
antisemitism and hate, and racism alike. There are Jewish 
students across this country that are afraid to leave their 
dorms, afraid to step on campus because of the hateful rhetoric 
that's infiltrated our schools.
    This question is to actually all the Presidents, but I did 
want Dr. Nadell to answer first. Students should be able to 
express their views and opinions without fear of retaliation. 
How are you balancing the protection of free speech, academic 
freedom with the need to also oppose normalizing antisemitism 
attitudes that are radical and dangerous? If we could just 
briefly answer that I want to hear from the Presidents on this.
    Ms. Nadell. Sure. Just briefly, obviously we need to 
protect free speech, but we also need to protect the safety of 
our students on campus, and you used the word normalizing 
antisemitism, and the problem is antisemitism has been 
normalized in the Nation, not just on campus.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you.
    Dr. Gay.
    Ms. Gay. Thank you. I would say education is the key here. 
Making students, and frankly the entire campus community more 
aware of the insidiousness of antisemitism, so that they are in 
a position to be able to recognize antisemitic tropes when they 
see them, and confront them in the moment.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you.
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the question. At Penn our policies 
are guided by the U.S. Constitution, so our long-standing open 
expression guidelines follow the Constitution. I think in 
addition to education, which I agree with, so that students 
are, and faculty and staff can identify and combat antisemitic 
tropes and speech. I think it is important to call out 
antisemitism in a very visible and public way, and a specific 
way, in order to make clear how it is contrary to the values of 
the institution where we are talking about speech alone.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you. Title VI provisions set the standard 
for what should be done to address racism, hate crimes and 
violence on campuses. Do you think that your DEI departments 
are equipped with the tools to combat antisemitism or hate on 
your campus, and if not, what changes do you plan to make? This 
is for all of the Presidents.
    Ms. Kornbluth. I can jump in here.
    Ms. Adams. Yes.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes. Our diversity equity and inclusion 
staff are absolutely charged with making the campus welcoming 
for all students, and that absolutely includes our Jewish and 
Israeli students. We absolutely see antisemitism as an 
inclusion issue.
    We are making sure that our staff who are dedicated to 
diversity equity inclusion are being trained about 
antisemitism, but you know it goes well beyond that staff. It 
is important that our leadership understands antisemitism, that 
our students and faculty understand antisemitism. I will just 
say one thing about MIT. We can make as many top-down 
initiatives as we want, but the heartening thing is that the 
discussion of antisemitism, and indeed Islamophobia is now 
proceeding at a grass roots level at MIT.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you very much. The next President?
    Ms. Magill. Our anti-bigotry efforts are also informed by a 
desire to make certain every person at the university feels 
welcome and can thrive, and that includes communities of faith 
and ethnicity. That is the value we have, and we are making 
sure that is from the top of the organization all through the 
organization.
    I believe over the longer term that is sort of an immediate 
action over the longer term, making sure the entire community 
is discussing understanding and capable of coming out and 
combating antisemitism when they see it.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you. Madam President?
    Ms. Gay. Our DEI office is a resource for the entire 
community, and the professionals in that office are committed 
to ensuring that everyone feels a sense of belonging. In 
building on an observation that President Kornbluth made, this 
is a shared responsibility that does not vest strictly in the 
hands of our DEI professionals, but it really is work that 
needs to be taken up by the entire community.
    The leadership for sure, but also the faculty, and the 
students and also doing their work.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you very much, and I am out of time. Madam 
Chair, I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Ms. Stefanik, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Stefanik. Dr. Gay, a Harvard student calling for the 
mass murder of African Americans is not protected free speech 
at Harvard, correct?
    Ms. Gay. Our commitment to free speech----
    Ms. Stefanik. It is a yes or no question. Is that correct? 
Is that okay for students to call for the mass murder of 
African Americans at Harvard? Is that protected free speech?
    Ms. Gay. Our commitment to free speech extends----
    Ms. Stefanik. It is a yes or no question. Let me ask you 
this. You are President of Harvard, so I assume you are 
familiar with the term intifada, correct?
    Ms. Gay. I have heard that term, yes.
    Ms. Stefanik. You understand that the use of the term 
intifada in the context of the Israeli Arab conflict is indeed 
a call for violent armed resistance against the State of 
Israel, including violence against civilians and the genocide 
of Jews. Are you aware of that?
    Ms. Gay. That type of hateful speech is personally 
abhorrent to me.
    Ms. Stefanik. There have been multiple marches at Harvard 
with students chanting, ``There is only one solution, intifada 
revolution.'' ``Globalize the intifada.'' Is that correct?
    Ms. Gay. I have heard that thoughtless, reckless and 
hateful language on our campus, yes.
    Ms. Stefanik. Based upon your testimony, you understand 
that this call for intifada is to commit genocide against the 
Jewish people in Israel and globally, correct?
    Ms. Gay. I will say again, that type of hateful speech is 
personally abhorrent to me.
    Ms. Stefanik. Do you believe that type of hateful speech is 
contrary to Harvard's Code of Conduct, or is it allowed at 
Harvard?
    Ms. Gay. It is at odds with the values of Harvard. Our 
values also----
    Ms. Stefanik. Can you not say here that it is against the 
Code of Conduct at Harvard?
    Ms. Gay. We embrace a commitment to free expression, even 
of views that are objectionable, offensive, hateful. It is when 
that speech crosses into conduct that violates our policies 
against bullying, harassment, hate crimes.
    Ms. Stefanik. Does that speech not cross that barrier? Does 
that speech not call for the genocide of Jews, and the 
elimination of Israel? You testified that you understand that 
is the definition of intifada. Is that speech according to the 
Code of Conduct or not?
    Ms. Gay. We embrace a commitment to free expression, and 
give a wide berth to free expression, even of views that are 
objectionable, outrageous and offensive.
    Ms. Stefanik. You and I both know that is not the case. You 
are aware that Harvard ranked dead last when it came to free 
speech, are you not aware of that report?
    Ms. Gay. As I observed earlier, I reject that 
characterization.
    Ms. Stefanik. It is the data shows it is true. Is it true 
that Harvard previously rescinded multiple offers of admissions 
for applicants, and accepted freshmen for sharing offensive 
memes, racist statements, sometimes as young as 16 years old. 
Did Harvard not rescind those offers of admission?
    Ms. Gay. That long predates my time as President so I 
cannot speak to----
    Ms. Stefanik. You understand that Harvard made that 
decision to rescind those offers of admission?
    Ms. Gay. I have no reason to contradict the facts as you 
present them here.
    Ms. Stefanik. Correct, because it is a fact. You are also 
aware that a Winthrop House faculty dean was let go over who he 
chose to legally represent, correct? That was while you were 
dean.
    Ms. Gay. That is an incorrect characterization of what 
transpired.
    Ms. Stefanik. What is the characterization?
    Ms. Gay. I am not going to get into details about a 
personnel matter.
    Ms. Stefanik. Well, let me ask you this. Will admissions 
offers be rescinded, or any disciplinary action be taken 
against students or applicants who say from the river to the 
sea, or intifada advocating for the murder of Jews?
    Ms. Gay. As I have said, that type of hateful, reckless, 
offensive speech is personally abhorrent to me.
    Ms. Stefanik. Are you testifying today that no action will 
be taken? What action will be taken?
    Ms. Gay. When speech crosses into conduct that violates our 
policies, including policies against bullying, harassment or 
intimidation, we take action, and we have robust disciplinary 
processes that allow us to hold individuals accountable.
    Ms. Stefanik. What action has been taken against students 
who are harassing and calling for the genocide of Jews on 
Harvard's campus?
    Ms. Gay. I can assure you we have robust disciplinary 
processes with actions underway.
    Ms. Stefanik. What actions have been taken? I am not 
asking--I am asking what actions have been taken against those 
students?
    Ms. Gay. Given students' rights to privacy, and our 
obligations under FERPA, I will not say more about any specific 
cases, other than to reiterate that processes are ongoing.
    Ms. Stefanik. Do you know what the No. 1 hate crime in 
America is?
    Ms. Gay. I know that over the last couple of months there 
has been an alarming rise of antisemitism, which I understand 
is the critical topic that we are here to discuss.
    Ms. Stefanik. That is correct. It is anti-Jewish hate 
crimes. Harvard ranks the lowest when it comes to protecting 
Jewish students. This is why I have called for your 
resignation, and your testimony today not being able to answer 
with moral clarity, speaks volumes. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. The gentlewoman yields back. Mr. Norcross 
is not here. Ms. Jayapal, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Madam Chair. The Anti-Defamation 
League found that reports of antisemitism have nearly 
quadrupled since this point last year, and we are seeing that 
reflected on the college campuses with Jewish students 
reporting that they feel unsafe.
    No student should feel unsafe. I think we all agree 
antisemitism and indeed, all forms of hate, have to be rejected 
everywhere. While all of you as college administrators have a 
responsibility to condemn hate and acts of hate in all its 
forms, including antisemitism, I know that you also face the 
challenge of, and the responsibility of ensuring that people 
can engage in healthy debates of ideas in a way that fosters 
safety and inclusion for everyone.
    I want to thank you for your commitments to work to ensure 
continued diversity of perspectives on your campuses, a 
diversity of faculty, with varied lived experiences. I know 
that my republican colleagues have been trying to attack DEI 
initiatives, including the funding for those initiatives for 
some time, and I hope that that is clear in terms of some of 
the comments that have been made.
    I want to just give Dr. Gay 30 seconds to respond to 
anything given the line of questioning that you had right 
before, in case you wanted to say anything before I go to my 
lines of question.
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for the opportunity, but I am satisfied 
that I have conveyed our deep commitment to free expression, 
recognizing that it is uncomfortable.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Dr. Gay. Dr. Kornbluth, your 
institution is one of many that have responded to incidents 
between pro-Israel and pro-Palestine groups. Many college 
campuses have been grappling with their responses to prevent 
antisemitism, to prevent Islamophobia, and other forms of hate, 
while also making sure that every student feels safe to express 
their thoughts in accordance with the principles of free 
speech, and to engage in the idea of critical thought on 
college campuses, which I think is what many of us appreciated 
about our college experiences.
    Can you speak to the challenges that you have faced in 
condemning hate and acts of hate, while making sure that 
students were heard? Just want to appreciate the distinction 
that you made in one of your comments between what we can say 
and what we should say. Just say that frankly, I think there 
has been an explosion thanks to the previous President in part, 
that has shattered the norms of what is acceptable to say, and 
we are dealing with some of the effects of that.
    What challenges have you faced in condemning hate, and acts 
of hate, while making sure students were heard?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Thank you so much. You know----
    Ms. Jayapal. If you could just pull that microphone right 
up to you that would be great.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Oh, I am sorry. I am sorry. Thank you. You 
know I have to say my absolute goal is to ensure the safety of 
students and the continuity of our research and educational 
missions. These recent events have troubled me deeply, and we 
have mobilized as a campus.
    I think the most important thing is first knowledge to 
understand that, as I mentioned in a previous answer, that our 
leadership, our students and our faculty have to have 
knowledge, but way more importantly right now is these students 
are thrown together in classrooms and laboratories, and 
dormitories every day.
    This is where the dialog is taking place. We have to ensure 
that the have the tools for constructive communication across 
differences. We are bringing these discussions to the 
dormitories. We have a center for constructive engagement where 
the students are going to be able to have small roundtable 
discussions with each other.
    We have funded and mobilized, and I cannot tell you how 
wonderful our faculty have been. They just issued a statement 
from 300 faculty about unity and working together with the 
students. There have been lunches, there have been meetings for 
our Israeli and Jewish students with Jewish faculty, for our 
Arab and Muslim students, with Arab and Muslim faculty, but now 
they are working to figure out how to bring them together.
    If we are all going to live and work together productively, 
we have to move beyond normal training, which we are committed 
to, but to actual real dialog and to actually model 
constructive and civil dialog for our students. That is what 
being in university is all about.
    Ms. Jayapal. Very powerful. Professor Nadell, these 
challenges of protecting free speech while denouncing 
antisemitism, Islamophobia, all forms of hate, that is not 
unique to MIT or to the institutions that are here. Can you 
speak to the same question of the most effective ways to 
facilitate education and dialog to ease tensions at other 
colleges and in general?
    Ms. Nadell. The most effective ways, and obviously I very 
much appreciate your question because this is happening across 
the United States on colleges and campuses, small and large. 
The most effective ways are to recognize the many different 
levels and mechanisms for facilitating these dialogs at the 
student level, at the faculty level, at the administrative 
level, and bringing--how to unite the campus.
    Bringing the campus together. That is what we are all 
trying to do, and it does not happen overnight.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you all so much for your work. I yield 
back, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Mr. Allen you are recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Allen. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I want to thank each 
of you for being here today. First, and you know my colleague 
earlier asked the question, what is the truth? Of course, that 
question was asked 2000 years ago of Pilate, and of course you 
know, obviously knowledge is important, but what about wisdom?
    In full disclosure, I am a student. I believe in the God of 
the bible and His Word. The House of Representatives, we are 
without excuse. We have above the American flag In God We 
Trust. Really? Then we have the full face of Moses looking down 
on the entire body who gave us the first five books of the 
bible.
    Let me tell you how serious this issue is. In 1885 B.C. 
B.C., not A.D. B.C. The bible says Genesis 12:3, ``I will 
bless,'' talking about Israel. ``I will bless those who bless 
you, and whoever curses you I will curse. And all peoples of 
the earth would be blessed through you.'' That is a serious, 
serious promise.
    In fact, we heard one of the panelists talk about the Jesus 
of the bible, and of course our church was founded by Jesus, 
who was a Jew. The American church. In fact the church 
throughout the world. You know, this is the Committee of 
Education and Workforce.
    Illiteracy is the No. 1 problem in our workforce, but I 
think from a standpoint of truth, biblical illiteracy is the 
No. 1 problem in America. We are a biblically illiterate 
society. We have no idea about these promises that are ancient, 
and this book that the prophecies, every one of them has come 
to fruition. Every single one of them.
    With that, Dr. Magill, like so many others I have been 
extremely disappointed--I am sorry, Dr. Kornbluth, is that 
correct? Okay.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Dr. Kornbluth.
    Mr. Allen. At MIT Israeli and Jewish students were blocked 
from attending class by pro-Palestinian protests at the 
school's main entrance. The protest violated campus rules when 
the school ordered all protestors to leave the area or face 
suspension. The contingent Jewish counter protestors left. The 
pro-Palestinians stayed.
    Can you explain how that is fair to Jewish American 
citizens whose rights are being violated when you said because 
we later heard serious concerns about collateral consequences 
for students such as visas, and that sort of thing. Can you 
explain yourself there?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes. Thank you very much for the 
opportunity. I have to say when we started this protest, when 
the protest rather was started, I ordered a police presence to 
ensure safety, and we de-escalated when it was prudent, in a 
very tense situation amongst students.
    We avoided altercations and we kept everyone safe. We are 
now entering into a process of ensuring accountability. With 
respect to the consequences, we strive for outcomes that are 
proportional to the transgression. In this case, a violation of 
our time, place and manner rules for demonstration.
    I want to make one comment though about people attending 
classes. First of all, at no time----
    Mr. Allen. Well, I am limited on time here, so could you 
submit that to us in writing?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Absolutely.
    Mr. Allen. I have another question here. In fact, you know 
going back to talking about wisdom. Proverbs 9:10 says, ``The 
fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.'' With that, President 
Gay and President Magill, do either of you plan to suspend 
foreign students who violate the law or school policies?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for your question. Our international 
students are a vibrant part of our community and contribute 
significantly to Harvard's strength and are a real source of 
pride. All of our students, irrespective of their citizenship, 
are held accountable to following our policies, including our 
policies around bullying, harassment and intimidation. We hold 
them accountable for that.
    Mr. Allen. Okay. Well Dr. Magill, if you will submit those 
in writing, and I have a few other questions I would like for 
you all to answer. Thank you for being here, and Chair and I 
yield.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Allen. Ms. Wild, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Wild. Thank you, Madam Chair. I so wish that this 
hearing was one where we were having a robust intellectual 
discussion, taking advantage of the brilliant minds that we 
have in front of us about free speech, the limits of free 
speech and so forth. I fear that we have gotten away from that.
    I think the one thing that everybody in this room would 
agree on is that not all speech is protected or acceptable. For 
example, when elected officials lie, that is unacceptable. That 
sometimes means that they have to be removed from academic 
institutions where they may serve on boards, or in the case of 
Harvard, the senior advisory committee based on false claims of 
election fraud.
    But moving on to the subject of this hearing, let me just 
say as a Jewish mother of two students who are now fully 
launched, and I had to send off to college not so many years 
ago, I am very, very sympathetic to the concerns of the 
students and the parents about their safety, emotionally, 
physically, and otherwise.
    It is not just about antisemitism, it is about all forms of 
hate speech, whether it is anti-LGBT, Islamophobia, whatever it 
is, racist language, our students deserve a place of safety. 
Again, emotionally and physically. At the same time, I think of 
college as the place where we learn to think critically.
    To me that is the most important part of going to college. 
Here we are in this strange balancing act, and believe me, I 
feel for all of you because it is a balancing act that you have 
to perform. At what point do we determine, or do you determine, 
that speech is such that it incites violence, or it constitutes 
hate speech?
    I am going to ask President Magill from my home State of 
Pennsylvania, you saw a video at the beginning of this. To the 
extent that the protests at hand were referenced, did you see 
that video as an example of hate speech, or speech that would 
incite violence?
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the question from the 
Representative from the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I 
mean that video just as a human being, was very hard to watch. 
The chanting, I think calling for intifada global revolution 
very disturbing, and I can imagine many people's reaction to 
that would be one of fear.
    I believe that at a minimum that is hateful speech that has 
been and should be condemned. Whether it rises to the level of 
incitement to violence under the policies that Penn and the 
city of Philadelphia follow, which are guided by the United 
States Constitution, I think is a much more difficult question. 
The incitement to violence is a very narrow category.
    Ms. Wild. Let me just ask you there. If you became aware 
that a similar protest or rally, or whatever you call it, was 
going to be occurring on your campus tonight or tomorrow, how 
would you respond? What would your approach be?
    Ms. Magill. Well, our approach with all rallies, vigils, 
and protests is that our public safety officers and something 
called the open expression observers are present at all of 
them. We have a longstanding expression policy that makes sure 
are open expression policies are followed, so I would make sure 
that those people were there.
    Our public safety officers usually try to speak to the 
organizers of the conference and talk to them about what our 
rules are about protests, I am sorry, I think I said 
conference. About protests.
    Ms. Wild. Could I just stop you because yes you know these 
are really short hearings. Were any actions taken to shut down 
the protest? I think it was Sunday night, Saturday night, 
whichever night it was?
    Ms. Magill. The Philadelphia Police, they are what is 
called their civil action division was the lead on this, and 
no, I think they were there to make sure there was no 
incitement to violence and no violence. I do not think any 
actions were taken.
    Ms. Wild. Would you agree that in this case, Jewish 
students, undoubtedly felt very uncomfortable following that?
    Ms. Magill. I am sure that is true. Yes.
    Ms. Wild. I am sure you have heard from many of them and 
their parents as well.
    Ms. Magill. Yes. Yes. There were acts associated with that 
protest, which were defacing some buildings, which clearly 
would unquestionably be a criminal action, and the police are 
trying to determine who did that.
    Ms. Wild. Thank you. Unfortunately, as usual, my time has 
expired, but I hope we can continue this conversation in 
another format. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Foxx. I want to ask our members to be very 
careful about the words they use about our colleagues. We do 
not want to engage in personalities and so I am going to ask 
our members to hold themselves to a higher standard. I now 
recognize Mr. Banks.
    Mr. Banks. Ms. Magill, just weeks before the October 7 
terror attacks against Israel, Penn hosted a Palestine Rights 
Literature Festival. The event featured Mark Lamont Hill, who 
was fired by CNN for calling for the destruction of Israel. It 
also hosted and included a member of the Palestinian youth 
movement, which has collaborated with the anti-Israel terrorist 
and maybe most notably, Roger Waters, the really whacky former 
Pink Floyd vocalist.
    The same Roger Waters, by the way, who is publicly used 
anti-Jewish slurs, desecrated the memory of Anne Frank, and has 
dressed up as a Nazi and floated a pig balloon with the Star of 
David at many of his concerts. Why in the world would you host 
someone like that on your college campus to speak at the so-
called Palestinian Rights Literature Festival?
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this. 
Antisemitism has no place at Penn.
    Mr. Banks. Why would you invite--why did you invite Roger 
Waters? What did you think you would get out of him?
    Ms. Magill. Antisemitism has no place at Penn, and our free 
speech policies are guided by the United States Constitution.
    Mr. Banks. Why did you invite Roger Waters?
    Ms. Magill. Antisemitism does not have a place at Penn, 
and----
    Mr. Banks. Do you condemn what Roger Waters stands for?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, prior to the event, I issued a 
statement calling out these antisemitism of some of the 
speakers at that conference.
    Mr. Banks. Specifically, Roger Waters? Yes, or no?
    Ms. Magill. Roger Waters was among them.
    Mr. Banks. You specifically called out a guy who floated 
pig balloons with a Star of David at his concerts?
    Ms. Magill. I called out the anti----
    Mr. Banks. I have not seen the condemnation. I am going to 
go look for it after this hearing. I hope I can find that well 
recorded condemnation from you.
    Ms. Magill. I did call out the antisemitism of some of the 
speakers at a conference that had more than 100 people.
    Mr. Banks. In the aftermath of the Palestinian Rights 
Festival, you and your Board Chairman wrote a memo outlining 
Penn's free speech policies. You said, ``Penn does not regulate 
the content of speech or symbolic behavior.'' You wrote 
including speech, ``Incompatible with the school's values.''
    You went on to say that Penn does not have a policy against 
hate speech because, ``Defining and policing robust debate, 
even with respect to the most disturbing issues is unwise.'' 
That is what you wrote. In 2013, Penn canceled now Prime 
Minister Modi's scheduled keynote address at a Wharton hosted 
economic forum in the face of opposition from India and 
American professors.
    For the past year your administration has sought to punish 
Amy Wax, a tenured law professor for her stance on DEI and 
identity issues. Then you canceled an event with former ICE 
Director Tom Homan due to disruptive student protest simply 
because he worked for former President Donald Trump.
    Ms. Magill, the fact is that Penn regulates speech that it 
does not like. Everyone gets this. No one more than the faculty 
and students who know exactly where the lines are that the are 
okay to cross. Why did Penn let Professor Ahmad Almallah off 
the hook, who led hundreds of students in chanting, ``There is 
only one solution intifada revolution.'' Why does that 
professor still have a job at your university.
    Ms. Magill. Representative, our approach to speech is as I 
identified. It follows and is guided by the United States 
Constitution, which allows for robust perspectives. I disagree 
with the characterization that we treat speech differently, and 
I cannot discuss any individual disciplinary proceeding.
    Mr. Banks. The same goes for Penn Professor Ann Norton, who 
has repeatedly denied Hamas's worst atrocities on October 7. 
How about Huda Fakhreddine, who romanticized the murder of over 
1,000 Israeli Jews as ``Palestine inventing a new way of 
life,'' and clapped as a speaker said Jews should go back to 
Berlin and Moscow. Why does that professor still have a job at 
your university?
    Ms. Magill. I am very troubled by what you are describing, 
Congressman, that kind of, that is----
    Mr. Banks. You are speaking out of both sides of your 
mouth. You are defending it. You allowed these professors to 
teach at your college. You create a safe haven for this type of 
antisemitic behavior. You said something earlier about 
antisemitism being symbolic of the larger society. Your 
university is a hot bed of it.
    One of the reasons that we are seeing a rise of 
antisemitism as an unsafe environment for Jewish college 
students all over this country, you are largely responsible for 
it. With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Mr. Norcross, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Norcross. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Certainly for 
holding this hearing. What an incredibly important subject that 
has been thrust upon us, or should I say has been re-thrust. 
This is an issue that has been before our country and our world 
for quite some time.
    The one thing I do want to State before I go into my 
questioning is the idea of making this a partisan issue. It is 
disgusting. This issue has nothing to do with being on a red or 
blue team. This is an American issue in terms of what we are 
facing on our campuses and should not be taken under the light 
of a partisan issue.
    That being given, I do have some questions, particularly 
for the University of Pennsylvania and its President, who is 
within a couple thousand yards of my district. I will start 
with back during August Penn announced plans to host a 
Palestinian Rights Festival, that was going to be held in 
September.
    Given that the ADL identified many of the speakers, I 
believe the number was 25 as antisemitic, this continued to 
happen. The idea of what happened during that event, after the 
event, and as much as last night, as I was traveling down here 
to see what is still happening in and around the campus is 
extremely disturbing given the atrocities that have happened in 
the Middle East.
    Dr. Magill, did you have the power to stop this event?
    Ms. Magill. Under our approach to academics and academic 
freedom and free expression, Congressman, we have probably 
thousands of speakers to campus every single year. Many of them 
I disagree with. I do not cancel or censor them in advance of 
their arrival to campus.
    Mr. Norcross. Any time you use the word ``censor.'' Any 
event on your campus, you would never interfere for the fear of 
censoring somebody. Is that what you are suggesting.
    Ms. Magill. Well, Congressman, there are--we are of course 
always concerned about safety and security, so that could be a 
constraint we would be worrying about and thinking about an 
event. It is a very rare occasion----
    Mr. Norcross. There would be times that you would stop an 
event under the terms of censoring if you, under your opinion 
or those advising you, say there would be a security issue?
    Ms. Magill. Well, our approach is not to censor based on 
the content, but to worry about things like safety, security, 
and the time, place and manner in which the event would occur.
    Mr. Norcross. Given what happened in October, you could not 
see ahead that was going to happen. The idea that groups coming 
on that are clearly identified as antisemitic would be of grave 
concern?
    Ms. Magill. I was concerned about the antisemitism of some 
of the speakers at that conference, and also the timing of that 
conference was particularly painful, because it occurred during 
the holiest time of the Jewish year. That is why, in advance of 
the conference, while saying that we are committed to academic 
freedom and free expression, the conference would go on. I 
specifically condemned the antisemitism of some of the 
speakers.
    Mr. Norcross. Condemning. You would have the power to stop 
it if, in your opinion, there was a security issue?
    Ms. Magill. Well, Congressman, whether there is a security 
issue is something that I leave to our Public Safety 
individuals, and I defer to their judgments on those matters.
    Mr. Norcross. Did you ask them?
    Ms. Magill. We discuss the security and safety of every 
large conference that happens on our campus and yes, we did 
talk about this one.
    Mr. Norcross. They, in their opinion, along with you, 
decided that there were no security issues. By the nature, you 
would allow this to continue?
    Ms. Magill. We did not believe--we believed we were ready 
for any security concerns that might arise. Yes, it went ahead.
    Mr. Norcross. In hindsight, do you think that was a proper 
decision?
    Ms. Magill. I think canceling that conference would have 
been very inconsistent with academic freedom and free 
expression, despite the fact that the views of some of the 
people who came to that conference I find very, very 
objectionable because of their antisemitism.
    Mr. Norcross. Would you permit your academic departments to 
sponsor a conference with 25 speakers that the NAACP would 
identify as racist?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, we follow our policies always, and 
our policies are guided by the United States Constitution and 
the commitment to academic freedom and free expression.
    Mr. Norcross. Is that a yes or a no answer?
    Ms. Magill. The answer is that we follow our policies.
    Mr. Norcross. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Mr. Owens, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Owens. Thank you. Let me just start off by saying being 
raised in the 60's, the days of segregation, this is truly deja 
vu. One thing that I did learn through my growth over the years 
is that hate is not passed on in our genes. It is taught or 
untaught.
    What we are seeing here is hate being perpetuated. We keep 
people segregated, keep them from building bridges of trust, 
never allowing them to find commonality. Teach them that 
everything that is going wrong in life is because of somebody 
else's actions, and teach them to look at our differences, our 
color, creed and culture, and then teach them to judge each 
other.
    It is dehumanizing, it robs people of individuality, but 
the end game, if it is hate, it is very effective. We teach one 
race, all minorities, that they are oppressed. Through DEI, we 
then teach another race, whites and Jews, that they're 
oppressors. The result is hatred, segregation, the ability--
inability for our children to see evil when it's present.
    One of my Democratic colleagues was asked recently about 
the rape, the use of strategy by Hamas, to rape Jewish women 
and children, girls and women as terror. Her response was not 
to defend these women against these evil men, but to generally 
discuss hierarchical oppression.
    That is DEI. It is a failure to protect Jewish communities 
across our country at your universities. Let me just say this 
also. October 7th was a very different day in our lifetime, and 
yet every single time we talk about antisemitism, we some kind 
of way drift off into every other sense of racism.
    We are talking about 1,200 lives, babies being burned, 
beheaded, hostages and yet we cannot stay focused on 
antisemitism. I just remember a couple of years ago when we 
were dealing with Black Lives Matter, try to talk about Blue 
Lives Matter, Jew Lives Matter, Arab Lives Matter and you will 
be called a racist.
    It is time to focus on what is happening on your campuses. 
It might sound flowery all the ideas of what your values might 
be, but those values are not being translated to our kids. You 
have seen them in the streets every single day.
    MIT, there was a--we just--we heard from a university 
student here that a DEI official liked the most posts on their 
media, a post calling President Biden a liar for saying that 
Hamas beheaded babies. She also posted saying that Israel does 
not have the right to exist, it is an illegitimate, settler 
colony like the United States.
    I have a question regarding this idea of segregation, Dr. 
Gay. Harvard is now having graduations for black-only 
graduates, Hispanic-only graduates and gay-only graduates. How 
does that bring us together as opposed to dividing us based on 
color, creed and all the other things?
    By the way, is it okay for a white group to say we do not 
want other minorities to be part of our graduation?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for the question. There are few scenes 
that are more inspiring than being--
    Mr. Owens. I am sorry, I am sorry. I do not--I am going to 
ask you in a way that is going to be very quick, because I have 
little time. Is it okay to segregate people based on their 
color, yes, or no?
    Ms. Gay. I oppose segregation.
    Mr. Owens. Okay, well I do too, but it is happening on your 
campus, okay. Dr. Kornbluth, Kornbluth, I am sorry. We have on 
your campus something called Chocolate City for blacks only--
black only dorms, where whites are excluded. Is it okay also 
for whites to set up a white-only dorm where minorities are 
excluded?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Actually, at MIT, our students affiliate 
voluntarily with whichever dorm they want to. It is not 
exclusionary; it is actually positive selection by students, 
which dormitory they want to live in.
    Mr. Owens. Okay. It is okay for blacks to note make whites 
feel included. Is it okay for whites not to let blacks feel 
included on your campus? We are talking about segregation, and 
it is obviously happening on your campuses.
    Ms. Kornbluth. I think it is really important to say that 
there is a distinction between sending an exclusionary message 
and looking to other students for common experiences and 
support.
    Mr. Owens. Okay. Let me just--I am sorry. I am running out 
of time. What you are saying is very simply in the 1960's, it 
would have been okay for whites and blacks to segregate 
themselves, because they felt more like the people they are 
with.
    I disagree very, very much. Let me just say this. If in 
case we discover, and this is for everybody here really quick 
in the last few minutes, that there is a direct link from DEI 
and CRT to the growth of Marxist centered groups like BLM, 
Antifa, and pro-Hamas on campuses, would you then end the DEI 
initiatives on your campus, if there is a link between what 
that is and what the result of hatred? Would that be a--would 
that be finished on your campus? Real quickly. We have--just 
yes or no. Dr. Gay let us start with you. Yes or no.
    Ms. Gay. Our DEI efforts are about assuring that all of our 
community members welcomed----
    Mr. Owens. Okay. That is a yes or no. Okay, Doctor, I am 
sorry. Ms. Magill, yes or no. If it is found to be link between 
Marxist, BLM, Antifa and hate groups, yes or no.
    Ms. Magill. Our DEI Office is committed to having everyone 
for life.
    Mr. Owens. Okay. So no, all right.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Real quick. Just yes or no, sorry.
    Ms. Kornbluth. I find it hard to understand how equity and 
inclusion as a concept, is a hatred inducer--
    Mr. Owens. Okay. That is no. Okay. Thank you so much. I 
think that says a lot. Thank you. I appreciate it.
    Chairwoman Foxx. You can give an answer in writing, and I 
have to remind Members not to engage in personalities. Ms. 
McBath, you are recognized.
    Ms. McBath. Thank you so much, Chairwoman Foxx, Ranking 
Member Scott, to our staff, and thank you so much to our 
witnesses today. It is not lost on me that the intellect, the 
intelligence that we have on this panel today. The most 
intelligent minds that are leading our highest institutions are 
women. Thank you so very much.
    I had the privilege of attending a very similar hearing in 
the Higher Education Subcommittee just a few weeks ago, and I'm 
glad to see that we are continuing this conversation at a full 
Committee level. Active expressions of antisemitism have no 
place in our society, and definitely not on any college campus 
or institution here in the United States.
    What we must all understand is that this is not just the 
Jewish community's struggle. This is all of our struggle, and 
the Jewish community does not get to bear this burden alone. It 
is up to all of us to learn more and stand in solidarity 
against hate in our daily lives, to ensure that the violence 
and the tragedies that follow unchecked hatred will never be 
allowed to repeat themselves.
    I lost my son to that very hatred, so I understand it in my 
core. Similar to other expressions of racial and religious 
hatred, all freedom loving people, all those who truly believe 
in the ideals that this country was founded on and continues to 
strive toward, must stand together in the face of this 
disturbing increase in hate across the country and across the 
world.
    An outpouring of support for the Jewish community and 
public condemnation of this heinous acts by interfaith and 
community leaders and elected officials of all backgrounds is 
the exact type of action that we need to take to confront this 
form of radical evil. Unity in the face of intimidation is how 
we are effectively going to resist hate in all of its forms.
    These actions seek to divide and intimidate us. We must 
show that we will not be intimidated, that we will not falter 
when our neighbors need us the most, that we are united against 
hate and we choose to love instead, irregardless of our 
political ideologies or our ethnic differences.
    As Dr. King once said, and I quote ``Returning hate for 
hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already 
devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness. Only light 
can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do 
that.''
    My community in metropolitan Atlanta is home to the largest 
community in the Deep South, the largest Jewish community in 
the Deep South, and it is no stranger to these incidents of 
antisemitism. I recall participating in a press conference with 
interfaith leaders, our local law enforcement and elected 
officials.
    The Antidefamation League and the Consul General of Israel 
came to the Southeast to condemn the appearance of antisemitic 
vandalism and white supremacist symbols that were definitely 
expressed in our neighborhoods and our communities. While the 
reason for our gathering was very somber, it was uplifting to 
see so many different people from so many different faiths and 
backgrounds all come together to make it clear that this is 
antithetical to what our community and our society stands for.
    Dr. Nadell, I have had you before me before, and it is good 
to see you again. Can you please discuss some of the schools or 
the communities that have built strong interracial and 
interreligious connections and relationships in the aftermath 
of a racist or antisemitic incident, and what building those 
connections looks like, and why they are so critical and 
imperative to healing?
    Ms. Nadell. What--first of all, thank you. It is wonderful 
to see you again. What really stands out is how at the personal 
level change can happen. For example, at the University of 
California at Berkeley, which is a campus that has been riled, 
as these campuses have also been riled, a professor of Israel 
Studies and a faculty member from Middle Eastern Studies sent 
out a joint letter pleading with the campus to speak in a civil 
tone.
    These are two faculty members who do not agree politically 
on what has been going on, but they got together to write this, 
and then it was sent out to the entire community. It is those 
kinds of actions that we need to be applauding, and we need to 
be elevating and uplifting, and as I said before, they just do 
not tend to make headlines.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you.
    Ms. McBath. Thank you so very much, and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Ms. McBath. Mr. Good, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Good. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Ms. Magill, September 
21, a Penn student was taken in custody after bursting into a 
Jewish organization's morning prayer service shouting 
antisemitic comments, disrupting property and so forth.
    On November 10, after the October 7 Hamas attack, Penn 
issues an apology for a display of light projected on the 
campus buildings with anti-Israel messages, including phrases 
such as ``From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,'' 
and ``Zionism is racism.''
    On November 15, the Department of Ed announces that Penn is 
under investigation for possible civil rights violations of 
Title VI, and then just 2 days ago, another pro-Palestinian 
march happened on the edge of campus with Penn property being 
graffitied with offensive messages such as ``F the IDF, 
Intifada,'' the Arab word for uprising and so much--and more.
    There is a deeply troubling tendency by many on the Left, 
as has already been expressed in this hearing, in media, 
academia, among elected officials and even some on this 
Committee, who try to somehow conflate or equate antisemitism 
with so-called Islamophobia.
    It is troubling that it seems that it is only Jews or 
Israelis who when they are attacked or victimized, somehow 
become the oppressors or instigators of those attacks in the 
eyes of leftists or some on Penn's campus specifically.
    It is wrong to suggest antisemitism and Islamophobia are 
equivalent problems in this country, as noted already in this 
hearing. Jewish hate crime is the most predominant hate crime 
in this country today.
    Ms. Magill specifically, again just this past Sunday night, 
there was another march on the edge of UPenn campus, an anti-
Israeli march. Has there at any time since October 7, been an 
equivalent large scale gathering of crowds in support of the 
slaughter of Muslims or the elimination of an Arab or 
predominantly State. Has that happened on your campus or 
anywhere near your campus that you're aware of since October 
7th?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, any act of hate, I find 
abhorrent----
    Mr. Good. I asked a specific question. Has there been any 
large gathering, you know, in support of the slaughter of 
Muslims or the elimination of an Arab State on or near your 
campus that you're aware of since October 7th?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, not that I am aware of. There have 
been----
    Mr. Good. Okay, thank you. You would agree that it would be 
immoral or dishonest to treat the two as equivalent problems on 
campus, meaning antisemitism and Islamophobia, that there is 
equivalency there on the scale or the scope of the problem on 
campus. Would you agree that would be immoral or dishonest to 
equate the two?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, I abhor all acts of hate.
    Mr. Good. Would you agree that it is immoral or dishonest 
to equate the two, that the problems are equal on your college 
campus or other college campuses? Any evidence of that effect?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, I abhor all acts of hate.
    Mr. Good. Thank you, thank you. Dr. Gay, on October 8, 
nearly three dozen Harvard student groups authored a statement 
holding Israel responsible for the Hamas attack. On October 18, 
a Jewish Harvard Business School student was surrounded, 
accosted, and shoved to the ground while walking near and 
filming an anti-Israel protest.
    On November 10, when you condemned the use of the phrase 
``From river to the sea,'' over 100 faculty signed a letter 
criticizing your response to that, criticizing that phrase, 
you're condemning the use of that phrase.
    A Harvard Crimson survey of the class of 2022 said that--
showed that 93 percent of respondents viewed President Trump as 
unfavorable. Six percent of students said that they were 
conservative. 34 percent of students viewed favorably the 
Palestinian boycott, divestment and sanctions or BDS movement.
    Currently, Harvard is being investigated by the Department 
of Education for Title VI violations of civil rights. Title VI, 
as you know, prohibits recipients of Federal funds from 
discriminating on the basis of race, color or national origin.
    A Title VI violation would occur when institution has 
allowed, permitted or created a hostile environment that 
targets someone based on their race, color or national origin. 
We know, of course, that Harvard has a history of dividing 
people based on race, based on the Supreme Court's decision in 
Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard.
    Does Harvard actually teach antisemitism in classes?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. No, we 
do not, and we condemn antisemitism at Harvard. There is no 
place for antisemitism.
    Mr. Good. As you know, Harvard received over the last 4 
years $3.2 billion in Federal grants and contracts.
    During the 2021 school year, Harvard received 104 million 
through Title IV. Why should Congress continue to invest money 
in Harvard when Harvard clearly violates Title VI and helps 
foster a hostile Jewish--a hostile environment for Jewish 
students?
    Ms. Gay. We are committed at Harvard to ensuring that all 
of our students thrive, that they feel safe and secure, and we 
are grateful for our----
    Mr. Good. Well apparently, 100 professors who--100 
professors who sent that letter to you criticizing your 
condemnation of antisemitic remarks don't agree with that, and 
your students, your institution is clearly producing students 
who are sympathetic to a terrorist organization. Do not you 
think that is a misuse of taxpayer dollars? My time has 
expired. I yield back, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Good. Ms. Hayes, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Hayes. Thank you. First, I would like to frame my 
comments in the basic idea that I condemn all forms of hate. I 
do not think there is any splitting hairs there. That does not 
make me radical left. It makes me human to think that all 
people should feel safe in their environment.
    In the wake of the October 7th Hamas terrorist attacks in 
Israel, there has been a dramatic nationwide rise in reported 
antisemitic incidents, especially on college campuses. 
Antisemitism has been on the rise for at least a decade. The 
ADL found that the number of antisemitic incidents in the U.S. 
increased by more than 35 percent from 2021 to 2022, and we 
have seen those numbers skyrocket in the last 2 months.
    A few weeks ago, at Central Connecticut State University in 
my district, a racial slur and a swastika were written on a 
bathroom stall on campus. We should all be working to find 
solutions this problem, not doing what we are doing here today 
in this Committee.
    The Biden administration released the National Strategy to 
Counter Antisemitism earlier this year. The strategy seeks to 
increase awareness and education in schools, communities and 
the workplace about antisemitism. This includes having the 
United States Holocaust and Memorial Museum launch the first 
ever U.S.-based Holocaust Education Research Center, to promote 
effective Holocaust education.
    As a history teacher, I know the immense power of 
storytelling, and how healthy dialog is--and how healthy dialog 
is imperative to finding common ground. I would also like to 
make the point that teachers, professors, educators do not 
enter this profession to hate any group of people.
    I am happy to hear that all of the people on the panelists 
responded to the question by my colleague that you do not 
collect data under conservative or liberal views of faculty. I 
would argue that that would be unconstitutional.
    I would also like to note, in the case of Harvard, you had 
a very conservative, notable alum who was invited to join your 
advisory committee. Diversity of thought is important, and all 
those views should be welcome on any college campus.
    President Magill, what steps has the University of 
Pennsylvania taken in the history--to ensure students have an 
understanding of the history of antisemitism, in order to 
address the rise of hate on your college campus?
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the question very much. There are 
a wide variety of things we do at Penn. We are very proud to be 
home to a very strong Jewish Studies Department, with faculty 
members who are expert, like Dr. Nadell, on the History and 
Manifestation of Antisemitism.
    Many students are taking those classes. We are proud to 
call Penn home to the Katz Center for Judaic Studies, which is 
a world resource in historical materials about Judaica and 
antisemitism and many centuries of history actually, and many 
of our faculty and staff and students participate in programs 
at the Katz Center through their fellowships in education.
    We--the third thing I would identify and there is more to 
say, are we have many student groups that engage with one 
another across lines of disagreement, and they talk together, 
usually with the leadership of faculty, to learn from one 
another and from the faculty.
    Ms. Hayes. Which is exactly what is supposed to happen on a 
college campus. I also want to acknowledge the increase in 
Islamophobia after the October 7th attack, not so-called 
Islamophobia but Islamophobia. Palestinian students on and off 
college campuses have been targeted.
    President Gay, in your November 9th open letter to members 
of the Harvard community, you mentioned specific steps that you 
are implementing in connection with your ongoing work with the 
Antisemitism Advisory Group.
    Specifically, you mentioned work being conducted at the 
Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging. I will 
also just say that 18,000 complaints have been received by the 
Department of Education Office of Civil Rights, the same office 
that my colleagues are trying to defund.
    48 percent of those have been sex discrimination, 32 
percent disability discrimination and 17 percent based on race 
or national origin. We have a problem. We need to welcome and 
embrace diversity in this country and teach young people why it 
is important to have a full understanding.
    My time has expired, and I know I am going to be gaveled 
out. If you can just submit that question for the record, I 
would appreciate it, and thank you all for the work that you 
are doing.
    Ms. Magill. I would be happy to. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Ms. Hayes. Ms. Steel, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Steel. Thank you, Dr. Foxx, for leading this important 
hearing. In October, I introduced H.R. 5933, the Deterrent Act, 
to bring greater transparency and accountability for 
institutions of higher education, accepting donations from 
foreign entities.
    This bill will pass the House hopefully tomorrow, and I am 
hoping the Senate will take it up. The involvement of hostile 
foreign entities in our postsecondary institutions is one of 
the biggest threats facing colleges and universities.
    Question No. 1 is Ms. Kornbluth. In September 2019, then-
Secretary DeVos opened Section 117. It is avoiding disclosures 
section investigation into MIT that has not been closed. What 
concrete steps that has MIT taken to address the lack of 
Section 117 reporting?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Let me say and thank you for the question. 
We have cooperated fully. I cannot comment on an open 
investigation, but I have to say we have greatly increased our 
reporting to be fully compliant.
    Ms. Steel. It is not that all done yet, but it is still 
under investigation?
    Ms. Kornbluth. As I understand it.
    Ms. Steel. Okay. A study released just last month by the 
Institute for the Global Study of Antisemitism found that from 
2015 to 2020, institutions that accepted unreported money from 
Middle Eastern donors have been on average 300 more antisemitic 
incidents than those institutions that did not.
    President Gay, Magill and Kornbluth, any of you can answer 
this. Do you believe foreign nations with views hostile to 
Israel would desire U.S. students to echo their views? I think 
Dr. Gay can start.
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for the question. We have alumni all 
over the world, and those alumni, through their philanthropy, 
support student aid, scholarships, cutting edge research.
    One thing that their philanthropy does not do is influence 
how we run the university, how we enforce our policies, or how 
we keep our students safe.
    Ms. Steel. Okay.
    Ms. Magill. Thank you for the question. At Penn, we of 
course follow every law and regulation about donations from 
individuals in other countries. Beyond that, we do not accept 
any gift that would compromise our mission or create any sort 
of conflict of interest.
    We have a very elaborate vetting process, and we have 
declined gifts where we have a worry that would be inconsistent 
with our mission, and we are very clear about this.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes, thank you. All funds that come to MIT 
in any form are for open, publishable research. We retain full 
control over what research is conducted. We also have an 
extensive internal review process for reviewing foreign gifts. 
We also adhere to all Federal laws, and we see these reviews 
through the national security, economic security and 
importantly human rights.
    Ms. Steel. Thank you for your answers, and I hope that's 
really true. President Magill, from 2014 through 2019, Penn 
received a total of almost $300 million in Section 117 funding.
    Are you aware of the amount that was given by Qatar, where 
any of these donations conditioned on the inclusion of a pro-
Palestinian curriculum or pro-Palestinian events? Are you aware 
if any of these donations were conditioned only for pro-
Palestinian professors?
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the question. I want to repeat 
that we follow all laws, and we accept nothing that is 
inconsistent with our mission of teaching, research and 
service, and we would never accept conditions on gifts.
    My understanding is we have taken no government gifts from 
the Government of Qatar. We have a small number of alumni in 
Qatar who have given some gifts for annual gifts to schools, a 
very small number.
    Ms. Steel. Almost $300 million.
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, that figure as funds from Qatar is 
not one that I am familiar with. That is--I have--that is not 
what my information tells me.
    Ms. Steel. Do you know exactly how much you received from 
Qatar of Section 117 funding?
    Ms. Magill. The data I have--yes, I am aware of our 117 
filings. I have--maybe I can followup with you afterwards. That 
is not consistent with what I understand our 117 filings show, 
which is no government, no gifts from the Government of Qatar, 
and a very small number of annual gifts from alumni living in 
that country.
    Ms. Steel. Dr. Foxx, thank you very much and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. We will look forward to a followup. Ms. 
Stevens, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Stevens. It is absolutely essential that the Committee 
on Education and Workforce have a hearing about rising 
antisemitism in the United States of America, and what is 
unfolding on our college campuses.
    In particular, as we--many of us have the where were you 
moment on 9/11, I have the where were you on 10/7 moment, when 
I woke up to the news of the horrific and barbaric attack on 
Israel and what we learned that unfolded that day and horror.
    My thoughts went to our college campuses, and what would 
happen on our college campuses, particularly as Jewish students 
have felt persecuted and attacked and their families have been 
concerned for a multitude of years.
    I want to say that it is, it is incumbent on us to let 
Jewish students know that they are supported and that they 
belong. We know that the rule of university presidents 
encompasses a lot of things, and in my home State of Michigan, 
and in my home district at Oakland University our university 
president, Ora Pescovitz, wrote a very compelling op-ed, and 
she said, ``One of my roles is to decipher and distinguish 
between protecting free speech and tackling unlawful 
harassment.''
    I was wondering if our university presidents could chime in 
on how you balance that do that distinguishing and also that 
enforcing, to make sure that we do not have unlawful harassment 
or the incitement of violence on our college campuses? Would 
you like to start, Dr. Kornbluth?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Oh yes, sorry. Yes. Thank you for raising 
that. You know, college campuses are the crucible of ideas, 
where students are side by side and it is part of the education 
to hear things that they feel are uncomfortable.
    To be absolutely clear, speech can become a form of 
harassment, and our policies make absolutely clear that 
harassment is punishable. Speech that targets individuals, or 
again as we have heard, incites violence on our campus or 
crosses the line--these cross the line into harassment. This is 
taken very, very seriously.
    Ms. Stevens. We obviously know that you are subject to the 
Clery Act and adhere to its rules and clauses. Look, we have 
now data from the ADL. It says that since 10/7, we have now 
seen a 388 percent increase in antisemitism. We have to one, 
call out antisemitism, but two, make sure that we have the 
right anti-hate laws in place.
    It is important for us, as a Congress, to be partnering 
with all stakeholder groups. Something else along these lines, 
and maybe I am sharing--sharing this as a fellow student of the 
humanities, someone--I hold a master's in philosophy, and so a 
lot of times it is what is the question, not necessarily what 
is the answer.
    By the way, Dr. Nadell, I hail from American University. 
Two people graduated from my class in `06. We need to have the 
proper place to exchange ideas and have the space to ask tough 
questions. What happens when we remove humanities?
    What happens when we, when we allow for government to 
dictate what is being taught on our college campuses, similar 
to what we are seeing in Florida and in West Virginia? What 
risk does that pose, particularly when we talk about the proper 
teaching of history?
    Ms. Kornbluth. May I take that?
    Ms. Stevens. Yes.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes. You know, it is interesting. Coming 
from a majority STEM institution as I said, I cannot even think 
of a place where it is more important that our students also 
learn humanities, have a humanistic perspective.
    We all have to live and work together as people. In order 
for us to be successful when I think about the technologies 
that are coming down the road, we want our students to 
understand the moral implications----
    Ms. Stevens. We need to do both.
    Ms. Kornbluth. We need to do both.
    Ms. Stevens. We need to do both, and we will continue to 
call out antisemitism as Members of Congress and push on this 
topic. Five minutes is certainly not enough, and I call on our 
committee chair. Let us have a hearing about affirmative action 
and what the Supreme Court ruling has now done to minority 
students and minorities being able to join institutions of 
higher education.
    Let us have a hearing about Islamophobia and let us talk 
about anti-LGBTQ practices that are affecting the mental health 
of students on college campuses. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Mr. Kiley. The representative from Michigan, Ms. McClain, 
is recognized.
    Ms. McClain. Thank you. Thank you for being here today. I 
listened to your opening statement, and we all talked so 
passionately about what was happening on the college campuses 
as it pertains to antisemitism is absolutely unacceptable, and 
I appreciate that.
    However, talk is cheap, and we really need action. What I 
would like to talk a little bit about today is what actual 
action items, not lip service, but action items have happened? 
I will start with you. President Gay, under your leadership, 
Harvard has done little to condemn Hamas' brutal murder of 
woman and children, promote Israel's right to defend itself or 
protect Jewish students from harassment.
    For example, I am curious. What action was taken from 
Harvard when a Jewish student was mobbed on your campus last 
month? Action. Not lip service, action ma'am.
    Ms. Gay. This specific incident I have communicated with--I 
have communicated about publicly. As you may know, that is an 
incident that is currently under investigation by HUPD and the 
FBI.
    Ms. McClain. Any action. I am looking for the action.
    Ms. Gay. When that--and when that investigation is 
complete, we will address it through our student disciplinary 
process.
    Ms. McClain. You cannot answer. I am going to move on to my 
next question. Do you have an action item or not as of this 
time? Was any action taken? Any action.
    Ms. Gay. I cannot share more about a student----
    Ms. McClain. Okay. Thank you. Will these students 
intimidating Jewish students just because they are Jewish be 
expelled from the university?
    Ms. Gay. I am sorry, I did not catch your question.
    Ms. McClain. Will the students who are intimidating Jewish 
students just because they are Jewish be expelled?
    Ms. Gay. You are describing conduct that sounds like it 
would violate our policies against bullying and intimidation 
and harassment, and if that is the case, it will be addressed 
through our policies.
    Ms. McClain. A simple answer, yes. Thank you. Another 
question. Why did you allow protestors to occupy University 
Hall for 24 hours, and not only were these students not 
punished, but two of your deans provided them with food and 
promised no disciplinary action would be taken? That was 
reported by the Harvard Crimson.
    Ms. Gay. I can assure you that we have very strong 
disciplinary processes, and where conduct violates our 
policies, we use those policies.
    Ms. McClain. Did conduct violate your policies during that 
incident?
    Ms. Gay. We have disciplinary processes underway.
    Ms. McClain. Is there an answer to that or not?
    Ms. Gay. We have disciplinary processes underway.
    Ms. McClain. Was any discipline action? I love the lip 
service. I do, and you academics, I love that. I am looking for 
an action item. Yes, no, was anybody expelled, any action item? 
If you do not know, that is okay too.
    Ms. Gay. We hold our community to account for our policies.
    Ms. McClain. All right. I will reclaim my time. Thank you. 
President Magill, under your tenure swastikas have been drawn 
outside residence halls where Jewish students live. The Hillel 
House was broken into. Jewish students urged not to where 
symbols of their ethnicity, and those same students harassed 
when they go to collect challah for Shabbat.
    I will be submitting questions for the record on outbreaks 
of antisemitism at UPenn, and I look forward to your response, 
because obviously 5 minutes is just way too short of an answer. 
I would encourage you to give answers.
    We deserve answers. People deserve answers, not rhetoric. 
Action items. It is clear that the Jewish students on all of 
your campuses are afraid to be themselves, because you have 
refused to take real action. There is that word, action against 
antisemitism, right?
    A lot of rhetoric, no action. I strongly encourage all of 
you to look at the Holocaust Learning Experience set up by 
MorseLife Health System in Florida, to teach lessons from the 
actual Holocaust to students in 5th through 12th grade. This 
program has trained hundreds of teachers in two short years and 
has gone a long way to teaching students about the harm 
antisemitism has in our communities.
    Harvard, UPenn and MIT, I think you could learn a little 
bit about this. With the remainder of my time, I will yield to 
Ms. Stefanik.
    Ms. Stefanik. Thanks for yielding. Harvard receives funding 
from foreign entities and governments which support its Middle 
East Studies Department; correct?
    Ms. Gay. We receive funding from variety of sources, 
because we have alumni from all over the world.
    Ms. Stefanik. That is correct, right? The Middle Eastern 
Studies Department?
    Ms. Gay. We receive funding from various sources.
    Ms. Stefanik. It is a yes or a no. Are you not aware when 
Middle Eastern Studies Department receives funding?
    Ms. Gay. We are receiving funding from various sources.
    Ms. Stefanik. I am asking you a yes or no question. You are 
under oath in front of the U.S. Congress. You are giving lip 
service provided by your attorneys. It is a yes or no question. 
Harvard receives from foreign entities and governments which 
support its Middle Eastern Studies Department; correct?
    Ms. Gay. We have alumni all over the world, and we 
benefit----
    Ms. Stefanik. The answer is correct, yes? Yes? The answer 
is correct.
    Ms. Gay. We receive support from our alumni from all over 
the world, from individuals.
    Ms. Stefanik. What amount of support is that reported to 
the Federal Government?
    Ms. Gay. I would have to actually look at our filings.
    Ms. Stefanik. You do not know? As the president of the 
University, you do not know?
    Ms. Gay. Not that particular number, no.
    Ms. Stefanik. It is $1.5 billion over the past 3 years. Are 
you aware of that?
    Ms. Gay. I do not know if that is the correct number, but 
that is the number you shared.
    Ms. Stefanik. Has Harvard reported all of the Federal--oh, 
my time.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Ms. Manning, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you, Madam Chair. For years, virulent 
antisemitism has been on the rise on college campuses, and 
sadly since October 7th, the October 7 Hamas terrorist attack, 
campus antisemitism has skyrocketed on your campuses and all 
across the country.
    It is shocking, it is pervasive, it is threatening, and it 
is stunningly visible. The fear Jewish students are facing is 
real, and it is justified. Jewish students are trying to get an 
education while entrance to their classes is blocked by 
protests outside and inside classroom buildings.
    They sit in classes disrupted by protestors with bullhorns, 
accusing Israel of genocide, with students chanting ``Long live 
the Intifada.'' By the way, as we all know, the Intifadas in 
Israel included years of terrorist bus bombings and restaurant 
bombings that resulted in countless deaths of Jewish and Arab 
civilians.
    Jewish students in college dining rooms are confronted with 
banners that say, ``From the river to the sea,'' a phrase that 
calls for the end to the Jewish State and the killing of Jews. 
Do not take my word for it. You can listen to the leader of 
Hamas, who has been quite vocal about what that phrase means.
    A Jewish student at Harvard was asked by the professor to 
leave his class, because the other students were not 
comfortable having their discussion in front of that Jewish 
Israeli student. Jewish students have been pushed, spat upon, 
punched and told not to leave their dorms for their own safety 
during protests.
    A Jewish student in my home State was told to rewrite a 
paper he wrote that supported an Israeli view of the conflict, 
or he risked failing the course. Jewish students had their 
class interrupted when a professor told the students that they 
were going to take a break, so that all the students could go 
with him to attend the anti-Israel protest on campus.
    This intimidation, humiliation and exclusion of Jewish 
students is simply unacceptable. It would not be tolerated 
against any other minority group, and we need university 
presidents to do more to protect Jewish students.
    President Gay, you and I have talked about antisemitism. 
You have told me your goal is to eradicate antisemitism at 
Harvard. That is a lofty goal, but will you commit to doing 
everything necessary to keep Jewish students and faculty safe, 
and be able to participate in the full range of Harvard's 
learning experiences?
    Ms. Gay. The short answer is yes.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you, and will you enforce all the codes 
of conduct against students and faculty who violate those 
codes, and will you communicate those codes and your intention 
to hold students and faculty accountable?
    Ms. Gay. Absolutely.
    Ms. Manning. Will you endeavor to recenter the conversation 
about the Middle East back to a place of fact-based exchange, 
and evaluate your course offerings and your faculty to ensure 
that you have intellectual diversity and multiple perspectives 
about Israel and Zionism, including professors who support the 
right of Israel to exist, and support the right of Jewish 
people to self-determination in the Middle East Studies 
Department?
    Ms. Gay. Absolutely committed.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you, and will you commit to work with 
Jewish and Israeli scholars, to make sure Harvard has a full 
range of lectures and scholarship described, as described in 
Dr. Nadell's testimony?
    Ms. Gay. Education is the path forward here.
    Ms. Manning. I understand that you have condemned the 
phrase ``From the river to the sea.'' I also know that the 
Harvard School of Public Health has a course called the 
``Settler Colonial Determinants of Health,'' that introduces 
students to the concept of settler colonialism and its health 
equity implication. It uses case studies in the United States 
and Palestine and talks about poor health outcomes for 
indigenous and other non-settler communities.
    President Gray, are you aware that Jews were indeed 
indigenous to the land of Israel and have lived there for 2,000 
years?
    Ms. Gay. I do know about the long history in Israel.
    Ms. Manning. What is Harvard doing to educate members of 
the community about these phrases and other false accusations 
that Israel is a racist, settler, colonialist, apartheid State, 
even that Harvard is actually teaching courses with the 
underlying premise that Israel is a settler, colonial state?
    Ms. Gay. We have faculty. We have outside speakers who come 
and over the last couple of months in particular, have been 
providing more insight into the nature of the conflict and the 
way forward. Obviously, we have more work to do and that is 
part of how we are going to eradicate antisemitism on our 
campus.
    Ms. Manning. Sadly, my time is expiring, but I would like 
to followup on that and other courses at Harvard, and I would 
also like to followup with Ms. Magill about how her students 
felt, her Jewish students felt after the Palestinians Writers 
meeting, whether they in fact felt threatened and intimidated.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Ms. Manning.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Ms. Miller, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Miller. Thank you. Dr. Gay, when Harvard allows foreign 
students to enter the U.S. on a student visa, you are 
responsible for ensuring that they uphold our American values 
of free speech and free exercise of religion.
    Harvard can expel students who are here on a visa if they 
commit acts of violence or threaten violence against American 
citizens, which would terminate their student visas. Dr. Gay, 
has Harvard expelled any foreign students who are here on 
student visas for threatening violence against American 
students?
    Ms. Gay. Our international students are an enormous source 
of pride for Harvard, and part of our strength as an 
institution. We hold those students accountable--we hold those 
students----
    Ms. Miller. Absolutely. I just want to know if you--have 
you expelled anybody?
    Ms. Gay. We hold those students accountable to the same set 
of disciplinary processes that we hold all of our students 
accountable to.
    Ms. Miller. You have not expelled anybody? I am assuming 
your non-answer is an answer to the students. They now know you 
have not expelled any foreign student for threatening the 
Jewish students.
    Dr. Gay, if Harvard found out that a student organization 
was taking money or taking money from or coordinating with a 
foreign terrorist organization, would you immediately suspend 
that student organization?
    Ms. Gay. Our student organizations are recognized on the 
condition that they comply with Harvard policies. When they 
violate those policies, there are repercussions.
    Ms. Miller. Thank you. Doctor or Ms. Magill, today you said 
that you defend free speech at UPenn and follow the U.S. 
Constitution to determine your speech guidelines. Would you 
allow President Trump, who is a graduate of UPenn, to speak at 
UPenn if a student group invited him?
    Ms. Magill. Yes.
    Ms. Miller. That is excellent. I am sure President Trump 
will be happy to hear that you would welcome him on the UPenn 
campus. Ms. Magill, earlier this year, a former UPenn student 
told the House Judiciary Committee that she was forced to 
undress and change next to a grown man with male genitalia 18 
times a week in the locker room.
    Ms. Magill, do you think it is appropriate for UPenn to 
force young women to change in a locker room with biological 
men against their will?
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the question. At Penn, we follow 
the rules of competition, and if a student complies with the 
NCAA rules, they can compete for Penn.
    Ms. Miller. Yes. This is a clear violation of Title IX. You 
are violating the civil rights of your female students, and you 
will be held to account for it. Ms. Magill, as president of 
UPenn, can you give us some insight into why Joe Biden was paid 
almost a million dollars by UPenn? What were his 
responsibilities when he is at UPenn? Did he teach a class?
    Ms. Magill. I appreciate the question. President Biden was 
a professor of Practice at the University of Pennsylvania for a 
little over 2 years. My understanding is that his salary was 
$400,000 a year. We also had Mr. Jeb Bush as a professor of 
Practice at the University of Pennsylvania. Professor--
President Biden had a wide variety of obligations. He was in 
many different classes----
    Ms. Miller. What obligations exactly did he have?
    Ms. Magill. He was--he held seminars. He was in many 
different classes. He interacted with thousands of students 
over the time he was there. He invited speakers. The goal of 
the Center was to enhance----
    Ms. Miller. For $400,000? Anonymous student--anonymous 
Chinese donations poured into UPenn after your university hired 
Joe Biden, and he appeared to have a no-show job. The House 
Oversight Committee is going to get to the bottom of this, and 
I yield the remainder of my time to Dr. Foxx.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you very much. President Magill, on 
Sunday I received a letter from the Wharton Club of Israel, 
outlining their efforts to secure a briefing for you and other 
leaders of your campus by a representative of the Israeli 
Defense Forces.
    We have seen significant efforts to deny the seriousness of 
Hamas's attacks of terror on October 7th. I assume providing 
your campus leadership information about what actually happened 
would be helpful, as you address the explosion of antisemitism.
    Unfortunately, they said they were informed by your office 
that briefing will not happen this calendar year. That leaves 
the impression that you do not want the information, President 
Magill. Will you commit to getting a briefing scheduled before 
the end of the year from the IDF?
    Ms. Magill. Madam Chairwoman, I do not in any way deny the 
brutality and barbaric nature of the Hamas attack on October 
7th.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Will you get a briefing? We in Congress 
have had a briefing and seen the films.
    Ms. Magill. I receive many invitations. I do have to attend 
to my calendar.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Dr. Kornbluth, will you hear what these 
people have to say?
    Ms. Kornbluth. I will hear what anyone who wants to give me 
information wants to say.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, thank you. I yield back. Mr. 
Bowman, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you so much, Madam Chair, and thank you 
to our witnesses for being here. I really appreciate you taking 
the time and sharing your experiences and expertise during this 
very difficult time.
    A quick yes or no question. Do you all feel that education 
globally is very important in addressing the issue of 
antisemitism? You can just shake your head or say yes, yes.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Absolutely.
    Mr. Bowman. Education is key, okay. Thank you for saying 
that. I am asking that question because a lot of this 
conversation has been framed around holding students 
accountable for their threats of violence toward Jewish 
students, as they should be held accountable, absolutely, and 
some of it has been framed around, you know, additional 
punishments, of course.
    There has been a lot of political pandering discussed here, 
without the action that goes with the accountability and the 
condemnation that must happen when we see antisemitism as it 
raises its head. What I mean by that is I introduced something 
called the Great Replacement Theory Resolution, and I wanted us 
as Congress to condemn the Great Replacement theory.
    The Great Replacement Theory is a white supremacist theory 
that says Jews, blacks and immigrants are looking to replace 
white people in America. I introduced that theory last 
Congress. It passed along Democratic lines. I do not believe 
any Republicans voted for that particular resolution.
    In addition, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
continue to look to cut funding to the Department of Education, 
which will be critical to helping us fight antisemitism. In 
addition, we have discussed already cuts to the Office of Civil 
Rights that my Republican colleagues support, that also is 
critical to fighting antisemitism. I would also add cuts to the 
Department of Health and Human Services as part of this 
conversation.
    Absolutely we must condemn. Absolutely we must hold people 
and students accountable. How do we get into the mud and do the 
real work of fighting antisemitism, without investing in 
education in the way that we need to invest? Not just at the 
higher education level, but in our K to 12 schools as well.
    I am a former K to 12 educator for 20 years. I taught 
elementary school. I was a dean in a high school, and I was a 
middle school principal for 10-1/2 years. Our kids read The 
Diary of Anne Frank. I have had students who have gone to the 
Holocaust Museum. I still have students in my district from the 
Bronx, black or brown, visiting the Holocaust Museum, becoming 
educated and wanting to learn more.
    Talk to me about the need, not just for you all as leaders 
in higher education, but every single person in this room's 
responsibility to fight antisemitism and anti-hate in all its 
forms. I just want to add, we have an Original Sin in our 
Nation of slavery and discrimination.
    That sin continued to evolve as segregation, separation and 
a lack of understanding and empathy of knowledge of each other. 
Can you just speak briefly to all of that? We will start here 
and go down the line.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes. Thank you, Congressman Bowman. This 
actually echoes what I had said earlier, which is it is every 
single one of our responsibilities, and this is why I am 
heartened by the full MIT community taking up this problem. It 
is a human problem.
    Mr. Bowman. Yes.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Person to person. I appreciate what you had 
to say about this.
    Ms. Nadell. I want to add that I am so glad that you have 
raised K through 12, because everybody here is talking as if 
what has happened on the college campus happened de novo, and 
those kids came to campus, and they never had an education 
before. We need to be teaching about antisemitism, not just the 
Holocaust antisemitism, and racism in America.
    Mr. Bowman. Our kids live in segregated communities. You 
have white kids living with white kids, black kids living with 
black. They never interact with each other. They do not go to 
school together. They do not know each other. Of course hate is 
going to be a major part of our society if we continue our 
segregation in our communities, in our homes. I am sorry, 
please.
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, I so appreciate what you asked, 
and I think one of the thoughts I have is that immediate action 
is very important, and the calling out of the hateful action 
and for the longer term. It is an all-societal education 
obligation, as well as every one of our responsibilities to be 
fighting antisemitism.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you. Dr. Gay.
    Ms. Gay. Thank you so much for your question. We have spent 
a lot of time here talking about the importance of 
accountability for behavior that crosses the line. We talked 
about how important it is to denounce language that offends our 
values.
    Mr. Bowman. As we should.
    Ms. Gay. It is as we should. Ultimately the path forward is 
education. It is education about the history of this hate and 
this bigotry. It is also education about how it manifests in 
the present and what modern antisemitism tropes look like, and 
it is also education about how do you actually engage in civil 
dialog on really complex and divisive issues.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you so much. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Ms. Letlow, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Letlow. Thank you, Dr. Foxx. To our university 
presidents, yes or no. Have you established rigorous programs 
and rules to address and prevent sexual harassment and violence 
against women on your campuses, yes or no, Dr. Gay.
    Ms. Gay. Yes.
    Ms. Letlow. Yes. Ms. Magill.
    Ms. Magill. Yes.
    Ms. Letlow. Yes.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes.
    Ms. Letlow. Thank you. Please bear with me because as a 
mom, a daughter and a woman, what I am about to share is hard. 
An article from CNN which examines the Israeli investigation 
into acts of sexual violence by Hamas during the events of 
October 7th includes a testimony from a female witness of the 
Nova Festival attack.
    ``They bent someone over, and I understood he was raping 
her, and then he was passing her on to someone else.'' The 
woman who was not identified said of what she saw, ``She was 
alive. She stood on her feet, and she was bleeding from her 
back. I saw what he--I saw that he was pulling her hair. She 
had long, brown hair. I saw him chop off her breast, and then 
he was throwing it toward the road, tossed it to someone else 
and they started playing with it.''
    The witness added ``I remembered seeing another person 
raping her, and while he was within her, he shot her in the 
head.'' This is just one of hundreds of accounts of sexual 
assault that happened on October 7th. Dr. Gay, an article in 
the Harvard Crimson dated October 10th includes a statement 
from the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee, 
co-signed by 33 other student organizations at Harvard. I would 
like to read the statement to you.
    ``We, the undersigned student organizations, hold the 
Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding 
violence.'' How, Dr. Gay, do you reconcile the blatant 
hypocrisy of allowing your students a forum to promote and 
celebrate terrorist groups that make the rape and mutilation of 
women and children a core function of their operations, while 
at the same time working for years to combat sexual violence 
toward women?
    By allowing a month to pass before addressing with a real 
plan the demonstrations and intimidations on your campuses? 
What message is this and this delay conveying to your women on 
your campuses? I can only imagine how terrifying it is to be a 
Jewish woman on any of your campuses.
    Just last night, a Jewish student from MIT wrote to me that 
she felt fearful and was forced to leave her study group during 
her doctoral exams because someone in her group told her that 
the women at the Nova Festival deserved to die because they 
were partying on stolen land.
    Now while I am grateful for your condemning of antisemitism 
in statements to your students and to this Committee, it is not 
enough. There has been no real action to hold antisemitic 
students accountable for their behavior. They should be 
expelled.
    The bottom line is that the buck stops with university 
presidents and all students should feel safe on a college 
campus, especially in this case Jewish women, as it would be 
terrifying to know that my administration is not doing more 
than simply condemning student groups perpetuating terrorist 
messaging, and as a former administrator myself in higher 
education, this is a major step backward in all that we have 
done to stand up against sexual violence toward women.
    I have always defended higher education and this 
institution. Quite frankly, today, I am embarrassed. I yield 
back the remainder of my time to Ms. Stefanik.
    Ms. Stefanik. Dr. Gay, did anyone contact you about flying 
the Israeli flag over Harvard Yard?
    Ms. Gay. Yes.
    Ms. Stefanik. The decision was made not to allow the flag 
to be flown over Harvard Yard.
    Ms. Gay. It has been standard protocol at the university 
for years to only fly the American flag unless we have a 
visiting dignitary.
    Ms. Stefanik. The decision was made to allow the Ukraine 
flag to be flown over Harvard Yard?
    Ms. Gay. That was a decision that was made by my 
predecessor as an exception to a long-standing rule.
    Ms. Stefanik. It was an exception. You made an exception 
for the Ukrainian flag, but not the--the university made an 
exception for the Ukrainian flag, but not the Israeli flag?
    Ms. Gay. That was a choice made by my predecessor.
    Ms. Stefanik. Are you aware that there are stickers that 
are placed on Harvard University Dining Services food calling 
for Israeli apartheid? It says ``Warning. Sabra funds Israeli 
apartheid and the murder of Palestinians.'' Is that acceptable?
    Ms. Gay. I can assure you that we have strong disciplinary 
processes when there are violations of our rules.
    Ms. Stefanik. This is a violation of the rules?
    Ms. Gay. I cannot see that very clearly but I--
    Ms. Stefanik. Are you not aware of the stickers being 
placed on the food items provided to Harvard students?
    Ms. Gay. I do recall an episode like that.
    Ms. Stefanik. There are disciplinary actions ongoing?
    Ms. Gay. Given students' privacy and FERPA, which I am sure 
you know well, I will not say more about these particular 
cases, other than to say that disciplinary processes are 
underway.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Ms. Leger Fernandez, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you very much and thank you to 
the witnesses for being here. I am struck by the passion which 
we all are bringing, because we know that the issue we are 
talking about today, antisemitism, white supremacy, you know, 
the issues that give rise to this, the issues of hate need to 
be addressed.
    What saddens me is that my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle recently passed an appropriations bill out of the 
Committee that would cut funding to the Office of Civil Rights 
by 25 percent. We know that we must investigate these and hold 
universities, including your universities, or the universities 
in my home State of New Mexico accountable if they do not 
protect students from antisemitism.
    They do not protect students from Islamophobia. They do not 
protect students from the many versions of hate that we too 
often see in our communities. I would urge and encourage and 
ask and plead with my colleagues to fully fund the Department 
of Education and the Office of Civil Rights, so we could go 
after those instances where universities fail to do what they 
are required to do.
    Recently, I sat with students from New Mexico, from the 
University of New Mexico, to ask them to share with me so I 
could bring their stories here about what are you facing on our 
campus back home? Sadly, the stories I heard would make your 
heart cry. They made my heart cry. We heard from Sephardi 
students who are proud of the heritage they bring with them, 
having suffered through for their minds, the inquisition.
    We heard from Ashkenazis who have parents and grandparents, 
sorry, their, grandparents and great grandparents suffered 
through the Holocaust, and how there is a normalization--they 
are worried about the fact that antisemitism is now being 
normalized, and we all have a duty to fight back against that.
    One of the things that I pointed out is that there seems to 
be a lack of understanding of the history of antisemitism. 
There seems to be a lack of understanding of the attacks on 
Jews over the centuries. As we mentioned from the Inquisition 
and before that too, the Holocaust to the latest that we are 
now seeing.
    They said how come there is not general curricula that 
requires that we talk about the importance of K through 12 
understanding that? We know at Harvard, for example, that you 
have I believe a course on the Holocaust. Well, what do you 
have for before you get that specialized course? Like how are 
we making sure that all students understand that. You, Madam 
President, if you could answer that. I know you looked like you 
wanted to respond.
    Ms. Gay. You make an excellent point. Already in our 
curriculum, there are so many opportunities for students to 
learn more about the relevant history.
    I think one of the things that has become apparent over the 
last couple of months is that we have to find ways of making 
that education more broadly available to our campus community, 
to all of our students and also to our faculty and to our 
staff, and we have work to do on that for sure.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Because this idea that they are--that 
Jewish students and that Jews are not indigenous to these 
lands, I think is something that needs to be pushed back 
against, right, and that some of these false narratives, I 
think, are really important.
    I think one of the questions then is what do we do when 
there has been that loss of faith when students at UNM say we 
are being told we are not from that land, right? Students who 
have, who are indigenous, you know, who share both, you know, 
heritage of the Sephardi, heritage of the Zuni Pueblo, heritage 
of being Latino, who want to deserve to be able to claim it 
all.
    Like I would ask, and maybe Dr. Nadell, or I think you 
wanted to say something, how do we regain that trust?
    Ms. Kornbluth. What you are saying is really, really 
important. We are making a real effort to educate our students 
on the history of the Middle East. Our Center for International 
Studies has organized an online course, and really 
understanding the facts.
    The other thing I do want to say though about your comments 
on the Holocaust, as the last survivors of the Holocaust are 
passing away, it really behooves us to make sure our students 
at all levels understand the history of the Holocaust.
    As you say, this starts at K to 12, not just once they get 
to a State university.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Dr. Nadell, did you want--
    Ms. Nadell. I would just add that the magical word, online. 
We can really reach millions and millions of people with online 
programs about this history.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you, and with that, my time has 
expired, and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Ms. Leger Fernandez. Mr. Kiley, 
you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kiley. President Gay, a few months ago the Foundation 
for Individual Rights in Education released its rankings of how 
good colleges are at protecting free speech, and out of 248 
schools ranked, Harvard ranked dead last, number 248.
    In fact, it was the worse score in the history of the 
rankings, zero out of 100. Now you have quibbled with the 
study, the methodology, but you do not get to be dead last 
without there being some truth there. In the aftermath of 
October 7th including several times today, you have repeatedly 
stressed Harvard's commitment to free speech.
    You have certainly been more outspoken about free speech 
after October 7th than you were before. I do not think there is 
any doubt about that. Anyone looking at this objectively will 
see that you had literally the worst record in the country on 
free speech, and it was once' chance of globalizing the 
Intifada started disrupting classes and harassing students, 
that you suddenly became a stalwart for free speech. Do you 
understand why that is troubling to people?
    Ms. Gay. Respectfully I disagree with that perspective, and 
I do not think it is an accurate representation of how Harvard 
treats speech on campus. We are committed to free expression 
and making space for a wide range of views and voices and 
opinions, it is bedrock value to our institution----
    Mr. Kiley. Well thank you Dr. Gay, but I asked if you 
understand why people are troubled, and you proceeded to try to 
defend yourself, which suggests to me that you would not really 
understand and have not adequately tried to.
    I am going to ask you a few questions, and I would really 
appreciate a yes or no answer if you could. Do you believe 
Hamas is a terrorist organization?
    Ms. Gay. Hamas is a terrorist organization.
    Mr. Kiley. Senator Schumer in a speech a few days 
characterized October 7th as a vicious, blood-curdling 
premeditated massacre of innocent men, women and children and 
elderly. Do you agree with that characterization?
    Ms. Gay. That characterization is accurate, and I have 
condemned the heinous and barbaric terrorist attacks.
    Mr. Kiley. Thank you. Senator Schumer also said that when 
students on college campuses across the country who wear 
yarmulke or display a Jewish star are harassed, verbally 
vilified, pushed and even spat upon and punched, that is 
antisemitism. Do you agree with him that that's antisemitism?
    Ms. Gay. I agree.
    Mr. Kiley. Do you acknowledge that some incidents of that 
nature have been occurring on Harvard's campus?
    Ms. Gay. I have been talking with students over the last 
couple of months, and they have shared searing testimony about 
some of the things that they have experienced.
    Mr. Kiley. I am glad you have made that outreach. If you 
were talking to a prospective student's family, a Jewish 
student's family right now, could you look them in the eye and 
tell them that their son or daughter would be safe and feel 
safe and welcome on your campus?
    Ms. Gay. We are absolutely committed to student
    safety and to making sure that every----
    Mr. Kiley. Yes, but I did not ask that question about your 
commitment. I said could you look them in the eye right now, 
the family of a prospective Jewish student, and assure them 
that their son or daughter would feel safe and welcome on your 
campus?
    Ms. Gay. We are taking every step to ensure their physical 
and their psychological safety, and I stand by that.
    Mr. Kiley. Yes or no to my question though. Did you want to 
answer it?
    Ms. Gay. I answered your question.
    Mr. Kiley. I guess not. If--would you say that a person who 
is an avowed neo-Nazi is someone that you would want to be part 
of the Harvard community?
    Ms. Gay. Those are not consistent with Harvard's values, 
but at the same time, we allowed a wide berth for free 
expression and a variety of views.
    Mr. Kiley. The question was would you want such a person 
who was an avowed neo-Nazi to be part of the Harvard community, 
yes or no?
    Ms. Gay. Those are not consistent with Harvard values.
    Mr. Kiley. You would not want such a person to be part of 
the community?
    Ms. Gay. Those are not consistent with Harvard values.
    Mr. Kiley. Would you want someone who has called for the 
eradication of the Jewish people to be part of the Harvard 
community?
    Ms. Gay. Again, those are not consistent with Harvard 
values, where we are committed to making no space on our campus 
for antisemitism----
    Mr. Kiley. Would you want someone who has called for the 
elimination of the State of Israel to be part of the Harvard 
community?
    Ms. Gay. There is no place at Harvard for antisemitism.
    Mr. Kiley. The elimination of the State of Israel, someone 
who advocates for that, is that someone you would want to be 
part of the Harvard community?
    Ms. Gay. There is no place for antisemitism at Harvard.
    Mr. Kiley. You have not answered my questions very well, 
Dr. Gay, so I will move on. You said today that you are proud 
of Harvard's initial response, the initial steps Harvard has 
taken in the immediate aftermath of October 7th. One of your 
predecessors, Dr. Larry Summers, was anything but proud.
    He said in his 50 years of Harvard affiliation, I have 
never been as disillusioned and alienated as I am today. The 
silence of Harvard's leadership has allowed Harvard to appear 
at best neutral toward acts of terror against the Jewish State 
of Israel.
    Looking back, is there anything you would have done 
differently in the aftermath of October 7th?
    Ms. Gay. To be clear about what I was doing on October 7th, 
it was identifying whether or not we had any faculty or 
students who are in Israel----
    Mr. Kiley. Is there anything you would have done 
differently?
    Ms. Gay. Had I known that the statement issued by the 
students would have been wrongly attributed to the university, 
I would have spoken sooner about it. I was focused on action 
that weekend, not statements.
    Mr. Kiley. Well, I appreciate you saying that, but it is 
clear for me from your testimony, President Gay, I don't think 
you are a person of any kind of prejudice yourself. You clearly 
seem to believe that you need to--that the forces of 
antisemitism are a constituency that needs to be catered to.
    I think that is clear from your silence, from the carefully 
parsed statements from the Orwellian passive voice, and 
unfortunately that message was heard loud and clear by the 
forces of antisemitism on your campus and has reverberated 
across American higher education and seeped into our broader 
culture.
    We need fundamental cultural change on university campuses.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Kiley.
    Mr. Kiley. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Kiley. Mr. DeSaulnier, you 
are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank the 
witnesses and just comment. I guess this is the best and worst 
of times from my perspective for this Committee, that looking 
at the panel and the positions you hold are not something that 
I could have imagined when I went to college many years ago. 
Thank you for your vocations. I mean that with all sincerity, 
not your careers.
    Dr. Gay, I want to just mention last night I had a 
wonderful conversation with a dear friend who I started my 
friendship with at your institution. Gabby Giffords and I were 
both in State and local government. We went through that 
program, and it was a wonderful experience.
    It was one of those examples of where academia interacted 
with the real world and the world of action. I want to thank 
you for that.
    Dr. Nadell, I wanted to talk to you as somebody from the 
Bay area and very involved with technology for many years, 
about its impact on our public discourse, on hatred, on 
antisemitism, on racism. I am reflecting on a Berkeley 
professor, Michael Goldhaber, I think.
    Let me check, yes. Yes. He is the Cassandra of the 
Internet, according to the New York Times, where 30 years ago 
he predicted that once people started to connect with 
technology, that the sociology of reality and knowledge would 
change. I would say this hearing is a comment to that.
    Could you comment on social media's impact on antisemitism 
and hatred, both in academia and as you see it in your 
research.
    Ms. Nadell. Thank you for the question. Social media has 
been probably the most destructive force for spreading 
antisemitism ever imaginable, certainly in my own lifetime. 
When a pop star like Kanye West can put out a few messages that 
are antisemitic and he has millions and millions of followers, 
and in the wake of that, Jewish students were also feeling 
terribly unsafe and insecure.
    We have seen this over and over, and we have seen it 
harnessed not only from the left, but we have also seen it 
harnessed from the right. Social media in various chat forums, 
various different platforms were used to create the Unite the 
Right Rally in 2017, and of course the man who has been 
convicted of murdering 11 people at the Tree of Life Synagogue 
also posted on social media that he was not waiting any longer 
and he was going in. It has been terrible.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. There has been so much really good research 
and writing on the subject matter in the last 10 years, where I 
am thinking about The Shallows from Nicholas Carr in 2005, 
where his research shows that globally our cells are actually 
decreasing because of how we retain and absorb information.
    All of this on the educational side. Now I will ask, maybe 
starting with Dr. Gay, this is about the short-term political 
moment that we are in.
    I am equally concerned with, and I have had this 
conversation with the Chair and the Ranking Member, about what 
you see in education and how our brains are changing, because 
how neuroscience, everything we have learned because of 
research about how this works in the last 50 years.
    Until the Congress figures out how we role in this in this 
Committee, what is it doing to our--to young people. In 
Nicholas Carr's book, in The Chaos Machine. Susan Lynn, a 
distinguished member of your faculty, I just had a lovely 
conversation about her book, about who is minding our kids.
    I cannot help but ask this question, because it is part of 
a larger long-term problem that this Committee really should be 
dealing with in a nonpartisan, thoughtful way. What do you see 
when it comes to cognitive development and your students?
    Ms. Gay. Recognizing that I am not an expert, particularly 
on adolescent development on social media, but will share an 
observation, which is that one of the things that's been laid 
bare over the last couple of months is how ill equipped the 
community is and has been to deal with dialog in moments of 
crisis.
    Instead, what is substituted for that is the social 
modification of dialog. It is intemperate, it is a historical 
and just mean, and it's a way of engaging that has been deeply 
socialized through social media, and is reflexive for a lot of 
the students on our campus.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. Dr. Kornbluth, just because I just finished 
a book, Reestablishing Conversation, by one of your faculty, 
who talks about this.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. Maybe you can just briefly--
    Ms. Kornbluth. No. I agree completely with President Gay 
and I would say that social media is like a drug, right. It is 
addictive and it reinforces over and over again messages 
regardless of their truth.
    As educational communities, we need to strive for making 
sure our students know truth and speak to each other as human 
beings.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. That is beautiful. Thank you, Madam Chair. 
Hopefully we can have a further discussion about that 
particular issue in this Committee. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. DeSaulnier. Mr. Bean, you 
are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Bean. Thank you, very much and good afternoon to you 
and good afternoon panelists. Thank you so much for being here 
and your testimony today. There is a problem in your testimony, 
and I do not know if you know it. You testified that you value 
free speech so much that it does not harm
    [off mic].
    Very good, thank you. It came off, Madam Chair. Your 
testimony today. You have all testified that you value free 
speech, so long as it does not interfere with students. You 
have said that you have created a very safe haven, and you 
value safety for your students.
    The problem is the evidence does not support your 
testimony. Just as we started our meeting, the videotape showed 
what is really happening on your campuses. America sees what is 
happening, not only on your campuses but on campuses across 
America.
    Then just today, we had some courageous students, some of 
which are still in this room today, courageous students that 
testified on your campuses, contradicting, contradicting your 
testimony that it is a safe space. It is not a safe space.
    Imagine trying to be a Jewish student on campus, and just 
going to the library, going to class, going to wherever on--
just being scared to death. That is real, that is real. These 
videos and the testimony just does not add up.
    Here are some things that are--that we have seen, America 
has seen. There are these anti-Jewish campus organizations 
called Students for Justice in Palestine. They have been 
suspended and kicked off many campuses, but none of yours--
since October 7th. Their purpose is just to harass and 
intimidate Jewish students into retreating from campus life.
    President Gay, there are numerous videos of Students for 
Justice in Palestine. At Harvard, they are known as Palestine 
Solidarity Committee, assaulting and intimidating Jewish 
students on your campus. When Palestine Solidarity Committee 
took over University Hall, instead of removing them, your 
administration gave them burritos.
    President Kornbluth, in one of the most absurd, crazy 
campus incidents over the past 2 months, a viral video went of 
a math professor at MIT handing his lecture over to MIT's 
version of Students for Justice in Palestine, the MIT for 
Palestine Coalition, who invoked lies and just called for 
hatred and harm against Jewish students, and he sat and watched 
this.
    Here is your chance to tell America who has gotten fired, 
what organizations you have kicked off your campuses. Anybody 
want to jump in and say we have kicked them off or we have 
expelled students? Anybody want to jump in?
    [No response.]
    Mr. Bean. You have all also said that you value academic 
diversity, but you have no idea how many of your professors are 
liberal or how many of your professors are conservative. How do 
you know--if you do not know that, that is a pretty important 
piece of information.
    If you do not know that, how do you know that you are 
academically diverse? Anybody jump in. Just go for it.
    [No response.]
    Mr. Bean. I just happen to have the Harvard Crimson, which 
did a study of their professors on a--on Harvard campuses. This 
is dated last year. 80 percent of professors either identified 
as liberal or very liberal. 80 percent of the, of the faculty 
there versus 1 percent identified as conservative, zero percent 
identified as very conservative.
    80 percent versus 1 percent. President Gay, is that the 
type of academic diversity that you brag about at America's 
leading institution, Harvard?
    Ms. Gay. We seek to have a very diverse campus on every 
dimension----
    Mr. Bean. 80 percent versus 1 percent. You would say that 
is diverse. Madam Chair, I would like to yield the remaining 
time to the gentlewoman from New York, Ms. Stefanik.
    Ms. Stefanik. Thank you. Dr. Gay, according to Hillel 
College Guide, the Crimson Freshman Survey and even Harvard's 
own Education Next journal, the population of Jewish undergrads 
at Harvard has plummeted from roughly 25 percent in the 1980's 
to between five and 10 percent now. Why is that?
    Ms. Gay. That is not data that we collect as part of the 
admissions process. I cannot speak to those numbers or to the 
trajectory.
    Ms. Stefanik. What is the percentage of students who are 
Jewish at Harvard in undergraduate now?
    Ms. Gay. We do not collect religious affiliation as part of 
the admissions process.
    Ms. Stefanik. Do you not rely on data collected by Harvard 
Hillel, which you visited for the first time after October 7th? 
I will just be honest with you. When I was a freshman, I 
enjoyed going to Harvard Hillel and have the opportunity to 
celebrate Shabbat dinners with my fellow undergrads.
    The fact that it took you until after October 7th to go to 
Harvard Hillel is unacceptable. Yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Mr. Moran, you are recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Moran. Thank you, Madam Chair. Dr. Gay, I would like to 
direct my questions to you, if that is okay. In an open letter 
to members of the Harvard community that is posted on Harvard's 
website, you stated the following:
    ``Antisemitism has no place at Harvard.'' You also said 
``We are committed to doing the hard work to address the 
scourge.'' Just a moment, just moments ago when Representative 
Kiley asked you questions, you reaffirmed one of those 
statements and said ``There is no place at Harvard for 
antisemitism.'' Will you now reaffirm those statements today 
with me?
    Ms. Gay. Yes.
    Mr. Moran. Good. Are these mere words, or is Harvard 
willing to put action behind these words?
    Ms. Gay. We are acting on that commitment.
    Mr. Moran. Tell me how you are acting on that commitment in 
a very specific manner.
    Ms. Gay. Well to begin with, the immediate actions that are 
focused on, the physical security of our students and our 
campus. There is enhanced police presence, 24-7 threat 
monitoring, coordination with local, State and Federal law 
enforcement, and when necessary, we close the gates of Harvard 
Yard, so that outside actors are limited in their ability to 
use our campus as a platform. We have also----
    Mr. Moran. When you talk about--when you talk about 
``outside actors,'' let us talk about the inside actors. You 
have had a number of students and student organizations that 
have made many, many antisemitic statements in the past few 
months and past years frankly, and it has gone, in my opinion, 
without any response from the university.
    President Gay, a report by AMCHA Initiative for the 2021-
2022 academic year found that Harvard saw the most antisemitic 
incidents, that is 25 of any university surveyed. You were dean 
at the time; correct?
    Ms. Gay. I am sorry, what was the date?
    Mr. Moran. 2021-2022.
    Ms. Gay. Yes, I was. I was dean of the Faculty of Arts and 
Sciences, yes.
    Mr. Moran. In 2022, after the editors of the Harvard 
Crimson endorsed the antisemitic BDS movement, which seeks the 
destruction of Israel, a group of 49 faculty penned a letter 
defending the Crimson editors. Did you ever speak out against 
BDS during that time?
    Ms. Gay. The university and I am clear on our positions 
about BDS. We do not support that position. It is counter to 
academic freedom and at odds with the openness which is part of 
our strength as an institution.
    Mr. Moran. Well, when you say--you said earlier, and you 
reaffirmed to me the statement ``There is no place at Harvard 
for antisemitism.'' Well, those words really ring meaningless 
if those folks remain at Harvard that promote antisemitism. 
Would you agree?
    Ms. Gay. We do not sanction individuals for their political 
views or their speech. When that speech crosses into conduct 
that violates our behavior-based policies, bullying, harassment 
and intimidation, we take action.
    Mr. Moran. Have any students been expelled or disciplined 
for bullying, harassment or these actions that you are listing?
    Ms. Gay. I can assure you we have robust student 
disciplinary processes, and we use them.
    Mr. Moran. No, no, no, no. I am not--I did not ask about--I 
did not ask about your process. I asked if any students have 
been disciplined or removed from Harvard as a result of the 
bullying and the harassment that is taking place based on their 
antisemitic views in the past months since the October 7th 
attack?
    Ms. Gay. We consistently apply our policies.
    Mr. Moran. Have any students--can you give me a number? Has 
it been two, ten, 20 or have there been zero students that have 
been actually disciplined for their activity? Not their speech, 
their activity.
    Ms. Gay. Students have been held to account for any episode 
in which they violated our behavior-based policies.
    Mr. Moran. Do you know approximately how many of those 
students have been held to account in your mind, or is that 
something you are going to keep from public view? I am not 
asking for identification of students. I just want to know how 
many people; how many students actually have been held to a 
disciplinary standard?
    Ms. Gay. I am happy to have my office followup with some 
specific numbers, if that would be helpful to you.
    Mr. Moran. That would be very helpful. I am frankly 
surprised that you cannot appear before this body, having going 
to talk about this issue, and not be prepared to tell us 
whether or not any students, or to the extent or how many have 
actually been disciplined for their antisemitic behavior in the 
past months? You cannot tell me that?
    Ms. Gay. I can assure--what I can assure you is that we use 
our policies. We use our processes, and we hold students to 
account for their behavior.
    Mr. Moran. Recently a coalition of student groups on your 
campus posted an open letter that placed the sole blame of the 
Hamas attack on Israel. In fact, in that letter, they said that 
they----
    Mr. James. Thank you, sir. The gentleman's time has 
expired.
    Mr. Moran. I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. James. I would like now to acknowledge myself for 5 
minutes of questions. I came across an opinion article in the 
Michigan Daily, of U of M student paper written by an anonymous 
source with Michigan in Color.
    The article stated in the opening paragraph the following: 
``On October 7th, Palestinians in Gaza launched a surprise 
attack on the colonizing force of Israel, one of the largest-
ever Palestinian liberation operations in modern history.
    ``They invaded colonial settlements, bulldozed territorial 
walls and captured Israeli soldiers. Although any violence is 
unconscionable, the rebellion was unavoidable.'' This makes me 
think of a recent book written by Bari Weiss, that seeks to 
define antisemitism.
    ``Antisemitism successfully turns Jews into the symbol of 
whatever a given civilization defines as its most sinister and 
threatening qualities. When you look through the dark lens, you 
can understand how under Communism, the Jews were capitalists. 
How under Nazism, the Jews were the race contaminators.
    ``And today, when the greatest sins are racism and 
colonialism Israel, the Jew among nations, is being demonized 
as the last bastion of white racist colonialism, a unique 
source of evil not just in the region but the world. Whatever 
the role the Jews are needed for, well that's the part they are 
forced to play.''
    That is the part they are forced to play on your campuses, 
which is why you are here today. Now I know this article did 
not come out on your campuses, but this rhetoric is in lock 
step with much that we see on campuses today, and much of the 
heinous attacks against Jews we have seen throughout the 19th 
and 20th centuries.
    I want to ask for the record, because many of us here on 
Capitol Hill hear from our public and our constituents that you 
are failing to create space where issues of the day are debated 
without fear of cancellation or ostracization.
    Are you all concerned about the antisemitic rhetoric that 
we are seeing on these college campuses around the Nation, at 
each of your own? I do not think we can State enough 
individually, if you can give me maybe 15 to 10 seconds, what 
each of you are doing. Just remind us of what you are doing on 
your college campuses, 10-15 seconds each if you please.
    [No response.]
    Mr. James. Nothing. Okay, great. Some of your peers have 
turned a blind eye or even permitted antisemitic speech by 
faculty, students and outsiders on campus. The question today 
is again, what you're doing about it. I got silent a couple of 
seconds ago.
    Maybe you have been giving a couple of seconds to think 
about it. I will--I will make this easier. Will each of you 
commit to conducting a review or what is taught and promptly 
report back to this Committee with recommendations on how to 
address these topics?
    [No response.]
    Mr. James. Okay. I will take silence as a no. I want to 
just say that I am greatly concerned that students are being 
taught to view certain groups as oppressors, and now apparently 
that includes Jewish people. The silence on my two direct 
questions, I think, serves as a glaring answer for your lack of 
commitment for standing, standing in opposition.
    I fear our future and the future of our Nation when 
oppression is used so generally to green light reverse 
discrimination by people that hide behind your institutions, 
and this institutional leaders themselves. With that, I am just 
going to go ahead and move on, because I do not think you have 
any satisfactory answers for me.
    The House is currently in a series of votes, and members 
need to be on the House floor. As such, the Committee shall 
stand in recess until immediately following this last vote.
    I urge my colleagues to return quickly to the hearing 
following votes, and I appreciate the patience of our witnesses 
and the audience. I would ask that you all remain in your 
seats, so our witnesses are able to leave.
    [Recess.]
    Chairwoman Foxx. The Committee will be in order. I thank 
everyone for your patience while we recessed to go vote. I now 
recognize Ms. Chavez-DeRemer for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Chavez-DeRemer. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding 
this unfortunately necessary hearing. President Gay, Magill, 
Kornbluth while I appreciate your testimony, I am a bit 
confused. In each of your testimoneys, you address antisemitism 
on your campuses in the present and future tense, as if there 
is no underlying cause predating October 7th, which explains 
why many of your students were at the ready to harass, threaten 
and attack Jewish students.
    Are we really to believe that antisemitism did not exist on 
your campuses before the Hamas attack? As presidents of the 
universities, your jobs do not stop at fundraising and 
promoting academic success. The cultures of your campuses have 
no greater influence than you and what you choose to 
prioritize.
    At an educational institution, the most powerful mover of 
culture is the education itself. The opportunities to learn 
about people's history provide students the best chance to 
challenge pre-conceptions, biases and inspire curiosity to 
understand rather than villainize.
    At each of your schools, there are numerous classes focused 
on Latino, black, indigenous and AAPI history. The existence of 
such classes is necessary, speaks to your commitment to these 
communities. The commitment to the amplification of those 
voices.
    Minority groups need their voices at the table. The Jewish 
people make up 2.4 percent of America's population and are only 
.2 of the global population. For the past 5,000 years, they 
have been enslaved, lynched and systematically murdered. During 
the same time, they have relentlessly improved the course of 
humanity, selflessly contributing to societies which eventually 
betrayed them.
    President Gay, your university Harvard teaches only two 
courses on the history and culture of the Jewish people at the 
undergrad level. One of those classes is focused on portraying 
all Jews who support Israel's existence as colonialist and 
racist.
    Compared to the roughly 125 classes Harvard offers on 
Latino, black, indigenous and AAPI history, the discrepancy 
feels odd. You are not alone. President Magill, the University 
of Pennsylvania offers three classes on Jewish history to 
undergrads, and President Kornbluth, MIT only offers two 
classes on Jewish history to your undergrad students.
    This gives the impression that your deans and professors 
view Jews as an exception, that their voice as a minority group 
is not worth amplifying. This mere erasure of Jewish history 
from offered courses is chilling to me. Harvard, MIT and the 
University of Pennsylvania offer its students an incredibly 
limited opportunity to learn about the 5,000 years of Jewish 
history. It is no wonder so many of your students see Jews as 
having less humanity than the rest of us.
    In denying the Jewish voice a seat at the table, in denying 
your student body equitable access to Jewish history, you have 
created a hostile environment for Jewish students. If you 
provide your students real opportunities to learn about Jewish 
history at the same rate as you teach the history of groups, 
there would be wait lists for those classes.
    That would provide students the appropriate venue to 
discuss, debate and learn. It will inspire your students to 
have meaningful discussions amongst themselves about the full 
history of Jewish people. President Gay, Magill, and Kornbluth, 
you can assemble all the task forces you want, and organize 
countless students' discussions on the issue.
    I can assure you that your students, especially your Jewish 
students, those options come across as lazy and disingenuous. 
None of you have presented solutions which would address the 
causes of antisemitism at your schools. In your testimony, I 
have heard no self-reflection or acknowledge of failure.
    President Gay, in your testimony you said that you are 
guided by the simple mantra asking why not. To the three of 
you, I urge you to think of one simple question. Why not teach 
Jewish history? Madam Chair, I will yield the rest of my time.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Thank you Ms. Chavez-DeRemer. A 
study, a study from--a 2021 study from Jay Green and James Paul 
of the Heritage Foundation examined the social media feeds of 
741 DEI personnel at 65 universities.
    Those DEI staff interacted with almost three times as many 
posts about Israel as about China. Of those interactions about 
Israel, 96 percent were critical, while 62 percent of the 
interactions about China were favorable.
    What is your reaction to the fact that the DEI staff on 
your campuses appear more favorably disposed to one of the most 
depressive regimes in the world than they are to Israel, Dr. 
Gay?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you, Congresswoman. Our DEI Office and all 
the professionals in that office are committed to being a 
resource for the entire campus community, all of our students, 
all of our faculty, all of our staff. Their priority is 
ensuring that everyone feels a sense of belonging and they do 
that work motivated by a commitment to safety, security, to 
well-being and not within an ideological framework.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. The time is up. Mr. Comer, you 
are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Comer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Many of our country's 
top universities and colleges are for sale. That is a fact, and 
our biggest foreign adversaries know it. Take for instance 
China and the Chinese Communist Party.
    They have used so-called Confucious Institutes on college 
campuses to spread CCP propaganda. Now we are learning about 
billions of dollars flooding into our universities and colleges 
from countries supporting terrorists, terrorists that hate what 
our country stands for.
    For example, the U.S. Department of Education data shows 
that Qatar, a key backer and ally of Hamas, is one of the 
largest investors in U.S. universities. It has given more than 
$5 billion to U.S. institutions of higher education since 2001.
    Ms. Magill, data from Department of Education shows UPenn 
has received more than 1 and a1/2 billion dollars from foreign 
sources. Earlier, you shared with Representative Steel that 
Penn does not accept gifts from the Government of Qatar but has 
received gifts from alumni who reside in Qatar. Do you know the 
total amount of those gifts from alumni in Qatar?
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for the question, Congressman Comer. We 
of course follow all of the laws, and we accept no gifts that 
are inconsistent with our academic mission, that would create 
any interference with doing what we do at Penn.
    What I know about Qatar is what I mentioned earlier, is 
that I am not aware of any government gifts, and we have a few 
alumni in Qatar. The number I have in front of me is about 
$2,000 a year from the donors that we have, the private 
individuals in Qatar.
    Mr. Comer. Does Penn have a policy to not accept donations 
or gifts from countries that harbor and support terrorists.
    Ms. Gay. Congressman Comer our--we are guided by the 
Federal Government on this matter, and we follow all of the 
rules.
    Mr. Comer. Dr. Kornbluth, this report from the National 
Contagion Research Institute and the Institute for the Study of 
Global Antisemitism and Policy shows MIT received a total of 
$859 million from foreign sources between 2014 and 2019. Has 
MIT accepted money from Qatar?
    Ms. Kornbluth. All of our--as I said previously, all of our 
funds are for open, publishable research. We maintain full 
control over the research being conducted. I would have to get 
you the specific funding on Qatar via the staff after this 
session. It is publicly available information in the public 
record.
    Mr. Comer. Well, does MIT have a policy of not accepting 
money from countries that harbor or support terrorists?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Our review of all foreign money is seen 
through the lens of national security, economic security and 
human rights.
    Mr. Comer. I take it is no then? Do you--do you and your 
university think it is a good policy to accept donations from 
countries that support and/or harbor terrorists.
    Ms. Kornbluth. I told you what our policy is. Thank you.
    Mr. Comer. I ask unanimous consent to submit this report, 
Madam Chair, titled ``The Corruption of the American Mind'' 
into the record.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Without objection.
    [The information of Mr. Comer follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Comer. Dr. Gay, how much money does Harvard receive 
from foreign sources that support Hamas or have links to 
terrorist organizations, like Qatar, Lebanon and the 
Palestinian Authority?
    Ms. Gay. Excuse me, sorry Congressman. Harvard has policies 
that govern the acceptance of gifts and contracts, beginning 
with respecting Federal law, which means that we don't accept 
gifts or contracts from entities that are on restricted lists.
    Then we go further and only accept gifts that align with 
our mission and that provide autonomy for our research and our 
faculty. We have alumni all over the world, and their 
philanthropy supports student aid and scholarships and cutting-
edge research.
    Mr. Comer. Okay. The Department of Education reports that 
Harvard has received more than $19 million from Qatar, 2 and 1/
2 million from Lebanon and more than 1 and 1/2 million from the 
Palestinian Authority as of October 2023. As university 
president, do you think Harvard should be accepting money from 
countries that support terrorists?
    Ms. Gay. Again, we have strict policies that govern the 
gifts and contracts that we accept. We comply fully with 
Federal law.
    Mr. Comer. Do you have a personal opinion?
    Ms. Gay. We will not accept gifts that do not align with 
our mission and retain autonomy----
    Mr. Comer. Will you make a commitment to not accept money 
from countries that we know support terrorists?
    Ms. Gay. We follow Federal law.
    Mr. Comer. The antisemitism on college campuses across the 
country, including your campus, has been shocking to witness, 
and that goes to all the witnesses I have asked questions to. 
We have seen the celebration of terrorism on all of your 
campuses, including from faculty.
    When we see how much foreign money, including from our most 
dangerous adversaries, is going into our colleges and 
universities, maybe we should not be that surprised. You need 
to immediately reevaluate the sources of foreign donations and 
recognize the poisonous effect that this is happening on your 
campuses.
    Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Comer. Mr. Burlison, you 
are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for the 
witnesses that are here today. In response to the ongoing 
harassment of Jewish students, including supporting a National 
Day of Resistance, the Antidefamation League and the--sent a 
letter to colleges and universities around the country, urging 
them to investigate the activities of their local campus 
chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine.
    Several universities followed through with that, and as a 
result some universities kicked those chapters off their 
campuses. In some instances, Columbia University suspended the 
SJP and the Jewish Voice for Peace. What steps have your 
universities taken to address the Students for Justice in 
Palestine? Dr. Gray, Dr. Gay.
    Ms. Gay. Thank you for the question. As I indicated 
earlier, I reject so much of the hateful and reckless speech--
    Mr. Burlison. I do not want a long answer--I just want to 
know what--have you taken any steps like--have you followed 
suit with these other universities to remove this hateful 
organization from your campus?
    Ms. Gay. We do not punish students for their views, but we 
hold them accountable for their conduct and behavior, and any 
conduct that violates our rules against bullying, harassment or 
intimidation, we take action.
    Mr. Burlison. Your answer is no. Does it not--does it 
concern you that your policies say that intimidation is factor 
for removal, and yet this group clearly, their very presence is 
an intimidating factor to Israeli students. Do you have any 
concerns?
    Ms. Gay. I am concerned about students who do not feel safe 
and welcome on our campus and wanting to make sure--and I want 
to make sure that they receive all the support that they need. 
When other students transgress and violate our policies, they 
will be held accountable.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you. Ms. Magill, can you tell me at 
your university, have you taken actions to remove the Students 
for Justice in Palestine?
    Ms. Magill. Thanks for the question, Representative 
Burlison. We have similar policies, which is that any organized 
student group must comply with the rules of the university, and 
if they have violated those rules, they can be non-recognized.
    Mr. Burlison. Okay, and then Mrs. Kornbluth, same question.
    Ms. Kornbluth. As far as I know, we do not have an SJP 
chapter. We do have students who are allied with you know, are 
interested in advocating for the Palestinian cause. We are not 
aware of any national links of that group.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you. My next line of inquiry has to do 
with your lack of reporting standards when it comes to these 
foreign contributions, as was mentioned by my colleague. I 
understand that Harvard and MIT are under Section 117 
investigations. A New York Post article just recently revealed 
that MIT received over $859 million in foreign funding.
    I think Harvard received similar numbers, nearly, nearly 
$900 million. As was stated, some of this money is coming from 
countries in the Middle East that have a history of large 
contributions to fund these academic centers called the Middle 
East Study Centers. Are you--has Harvard taken any money to 
fund the Middle East Study Centers?
    Ms. Gay. We receive support from a variety of sources, and 
our alumni are all over the world, including in the Middle 
East, who support our activities on campus.
    Mr. Burlison. Well, an analysis has indicated that there is 
a direct correlation between the universities that have 
received money for these Middle East Study Centers and the 
activity of the SJP. I would highly encourage you to examine, 
and I will ask, I will just ask it directly.
    Is it because of the money that you are receiving from 
these foreign countries that you're not kicking these, this, 
these hate groups off campus?
    Ms. Gay. Our donors do not influence how we run the 
university, how we enforce our policies or how we keep our 
students safe.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you. I yield the rest of my time to my 
colleague from New York.
    Ms. Stefanik. Dr. Gay, does calling for the genocide of 
Jews violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment?
    Ms. Gay. The rules around bullying and harassment are quite 
specific, and if the context in which that language is used 
amounts to bullying and harassment, then we take--we take 
action against it.
    Ms. Stefanik. Can you say yes to that question, of does 
calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules on 
bullying and harassment?
    Ms. Gay. Calling for the genocide of Jews is antisemitic.
    Ms. Stefanik. Yes?
    Ms. Gay. That is antisemitic speech, and as I have said----
    Ms. Stefanik. It is a yes?
    Ms. Gay. When speech crosses into conduct----
    Ms. Stefanik. It is a yes? I have asked the witnesses 
each----
    Ms. Gay. Once when speech crosses--when speech crosses into 
conduct, we take action.
    Ms. Stefanik. Is that a yes? Is that a yes? The witness has 
not answered. Madam Chair, is that a yes? You cannot answer the 
question----
    Ms. Gay. When speech crosses into conduct, we take action.
    Chairwoman Foxx. I am sorry. I am sorry, Dr. Gay. I have to 
cut you off.
    Ms. Gay. Of course.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Mr. Williams, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I have the 
unfortunate distinction of being a graduate of the University 
of Pennsylvania, as well as a visiting student at Harvard 
University for a year. The purpose of this hearing is to assess 
the health of our most elite, and until recently esteemed 
educational institutions in this country.
    We raised the question, whether your institution and others 
like them deserve to enjoy the benefits of partnerships with 
our government. Research investments, student loan guarantees, 
tax-free status for your endowments. Funding for veterans to 
receive education is tied to their prior service, like myself, 
or their ongoing service.
    It has been stated several times that this runs in the tens 
of billions of dollars across higher education, perhaps even 
into $100 billion.
    Dr. Gay, you have repeatedly in your testimony today 
claimed that you believe in accountability, that acts of hate 
are personally abhorrent to you, that you follow Federal law, 
that you believe all parts of your community must feel safe and 
secure, and that education is the solution for antisemitism. 
Does this accurately reflect your views?
    Ms. Gay. I have expressed those views, yes.
    Mr. Williams. Those are your testimony today. How long have 
you been president of Harvard?
    Ms. Gay. Five months.
    Mr. Williams. Sorry?
    Ms. Gay. Five months.
    Mr. Williams. Uh-huh. What is your annual budget?
    Ms. Gay. For the entire university?
    Mr. Williams. Yes.
    Ms. Gay. About $6 billion, pretty close to that.
    Mr. Williams. Six billion. How many employees?
    Ms. Gay. We have 19,000 faculty and staff.
    Mr. Williams. How long is the--how large is the university 
endowment?
    Ms. Gay. It is just over $50 billion.
    Mr. Williams. How long has Harvard been in existence?
    Ms. Gay. 387 years.
    Mr. Williams. 337 years.
    Ms. Gay. 87.
    Mr. Williams. 87, sorry. Cut you by 50 there. You said that 
education is the solution. All of you agreed actually, that 
education is the solution for antisemitism, yet your 
educational institution under your leadership and previous 
leaders, is seething with hateful and threatening antisemitic 
demonstrations.
    These are only--as I mentioned, these are only against the 
Jewish students. No one else, just Jews at your school. You say 
you believe in accountability. Should the Federal Government 
keep shoveling money and privilege to institutions like yours 
that fail so profoundly in their mission?
    Your mission is to educate. Education's the solution. You 
have 387 years and you have arrived at this place of virulent 
antisemitism and hate. Why should the Federal Government 
continue to partner with you on such a failed accomplishment or 
lack of accomplishment?
    Ms. Gay. The Federal-university partnership is not only a 
critical source of the success of all American higher 
education, but also its----
    Mr. Williams. Well, maybe we should redirect it to the ones 
that are, because there are other universities that are 
succeeding. I am trying to get at the heart of if education is 
the solution. You do not seem to be accomplishing that 
solution, even though you have had a 387-year run up to stamp 
out antisemitism. What happened? Is it leadership?
    Ms. Gay. We have work to do to build the community that our 
students and our faculty deserve----
    Mr. Williams. Ha! Well, it is--I am looking backward. I am 
saying how did you arrive here, if education is your mission 
and antisemitism is your result? How did you arrive here?
    Let me--let me help. 100 years ago, Harvard, University of 
Pennsylvania, other Ivy League schools actually publicly and 
actively began restricting Jewish enrollment. Now I am proud to 
say that Syracuse University in my district resisted this trend 
and did not implement those kinds of policies.
    Today, we actually see the fruit of those decisions, and it 
seems to me that the leadership that we need needs moral 
clarity to understand the moment that we are in, and I am not 
really hearing that frankly from anyone. Ms. Magill, how long 
have you been the president of the University of Pennsylvania?
    Ms. Magill. Just under a year and a half.
    Mr. Williams. The budget and employees there?
    Ms. Magill. About $12 billion because we have a large 
health system. We have about 45,000 employees.
    Mr. Williams. The endowment please.
    Ms. Magill. About 20 billion.
    Mr. Williams. Do you not have enough resources to complete 
your mission, your stated goal of education?
    Ms. Magill. We have many resources that we invest in the 
education of our 30,000 students.
    Mr. Williams. If education is the mission and education is 
the solution, how did you Penn arrive at this horrible place, 
that actually I am ashamed to be an alumni of your university?
    Ms. Magill. I am very sorry to hear that Congressman.
    Mr. Williams. I am not alone.
    Ms. Magill. We have--we have work to do, I agree.
    Mr. Williams. Well, I keep hearing that. I think you have a 
need for leadership or a need of Federal intervention to cutoff 
the resources that allow this continued failed--this mission 
that is failed to continue. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you. Ms. Houchin, you are recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Houchin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to the 
witnesses for testifying today. I want to just say how 
frustrated I am that this hearing is even necessary. I would be 
naive to recognize--not to recognize though, antisemitism on 
our university campuses, including my home State.
    As you may know, this fall two members of the Indiana 
University Student Government published a resignation letter 
due to the blatant antisemitism of the student body president. 
According to their firsthand testimony, this student body 
president was intentionally neglecting the experience of Jewish 
students on campus, by not only refusing to meet or work with 
Jewish students, but by actively ignoring the voices of those 
who tried to bring attention to their issues, and the concerns 
for the well-being of their Jewish students.
    It is especially appalling when we recognize that 10 
percent of Indiana University student body is Jewish. Campus 
life in the United States has become a daily trial of 
intimidation and insult for our Jewish students, a hostile 
environment that began with statements from pro-Palestinian 
student organizations justifying terrorism has now rapidly 
spiraled into death threats and physical attacks, leaving 
Jewish students alarmed and vulnerable.
    At least 124 antisemitic incidents have been reported on 
campuses since October 7th, and that's likely a severe 
undercount. The response to this has been empty rhetoric. Words 
have been weak; action has been slow. No action has resulted in 
Jewish students feeling safe or welcome.
    This is an example as why I'm an original co-sponsor of a 
congressional resolution condemning the support of Hamas, 
Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations at our institutions 
of higher education. We will not tolerate the creation of a 
hostile environment for our Jewish students.
    Faculty and staff on college campuses, if you will not do 
it, then we will take action ourselves. Madam Chair, I would 
like to yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from 
New York.
    Ms. Stefanik. Dr. Kornbluth does--at MIT, does calling for 
the genocide of Jews violate MIT's code of conduct or rules 
regarding bullying and harassment, yes, or no?
    Ms. Kornbluth. If targeted at individuals not making public 
statements.
    Ms. Stefanik. Yes or no, calling for the genocide of Jews 
does not constitute bullying and harassment?
    Ms. Kornbluth. I have not heard calling for the genocide of 
Jews on our campus.
    Ms. Stefanik. You have heard chants for Intifada?
    Ms. Kornbluth. I have heard chants, which can be 
antisemitic depending on the context, when calling for the 
elimination of the Jewish people.
    Ms. Stefanik. Those would not be according to the MIT's 
code of conduct or rules?
    Ms. Kornbluth. That would be investigated as harassment if 
pervasive and severe.
    Ms. Stefanik. Ms. Magill, at Penn, does calling for the 
genocide of Jews violate Penn's rules or code of conduct, yes, 
or no?
    Ms. Magill. If the speech turns into conduct, it can be 
harassment, yes.
    Ms. Stefanik. I am asking specifically calling for the 
genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?
    Ms. Magill. If it is directed and severe or pervasive, it 
is harassment.
    Ms. Stefanik. The answer is yes?
    Ms. Magill. It is a context-dependent decision, 
Congresswoman.
    Ms. Stefanik. It is a context-dependent decision? That is 
your testimony today? Calling for the genocide of Jews is 
dependent upon the context? That is not bullying or harassment? 
This is the easiest question to answer, yes, Ms. Magill. So is 
your testimony that you will not answer yes.
    Ms. Magill. If it--if it is--if the speech becomes----
    Ms. Stefanik. Yes or no.
    Ms. Magill. If the speech becomes conduct, it can be 
harassment, yes.
    Ms. Stefanik. Conduct meaning committing the act of 
genocide? The speech is not harassment? This is unacceptable, 
Ms. Magill. I am going to give you one more opportunity for the 
world to see your answer. Does calling for the genocide of Jews 
violate Penn's code of conduct when it comes to bullying and 
harassment, yes or no?
    Ms. Magill. It can be harassment.
    Ms. Stefanik. The answer is yes, and Dr. Gay, at Harvard, 
does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules 
of bullying and harassment, yes or no?
    Ms. Gay. It can be, depending on the context.
    Ms. Stefanik. What is the context?
    Ms. Gay. Targeted as an individual, targeted at an 
individual.
    Ms. Stefanik. It is targeted at Jewish students, Jewish 
individuals. Do you understand your testimony is dehumanizing 
them? Do you understand that dehumanization is part of 
antisemitism?
    I will ask you one more time. Does calling for the genocide 
of Jews violate Harvard's rules of bullying and harassment, 
yes, or no?
    Ms. Gay. Antisemitic rhetoric when it crosses over into 
conduct----
    Ms. Stefanik. Is it antisemitic rhetoric----
    Ms. Gay. Antisemitic rhetoric, when it crosses into 
conduct, it amounts to bullying, harassment, intimidation, that 
is actionable conduct and we do take action.
    Ms. Stefanik. The answer is yes, that calling for the 
genocide of Jews violates Harvard code of conduct; correct?
    Ms. Gay. Again, it depends on the context.
    Ms. Stefanik. It does not depend on the context. The answer 
is yes, and this is why you should resign. These are 
unacceptable answers across the board.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Mr. Scott, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Freedom of speech protects not just 
popular speech. I have heard many of you refer to that. Can you 
comment on what speech is protected and what speech is not 
protected? Starting with Dr. Gay.
    Ms. Gay. Speech is protected, and that protection extends 
even to speech we find objectionable and offensive and even 
outrageous. It is when speech crosses into conduct that 
violates our very clear policies around bullying, harassment, 
intimidation, that it becomes actionable.
    Mr. Scott. When it is targeted and creates imminent threats 
of violence, that can actually be criminal?
    Ms. Gay. Yes.
    Mr. Scott. The Title VI standard is not that--it does not 
require all that. You can just have a--you have much less of a 
standard to create a violation of Title VI. When do you know--
what is the Title VI standard for when speech violates Title VI 
and creates a hostile environment?
    Ms. Gay. I cannot recite that from memory.
    Mr. Scott. Anybody know of the kinds of things that would 
constitute a Title VI?
    Ms. Kornbluth. Yes, a hostile environment that prevents the 
students from attaining their educational acquisition.
    Mr. Scott. Students have a right to feel safe on campus. 
Would the standard of a hostile environment apply to all 
students, or just Jewish students?
    Ms. Kornbluth. All students.
    Mr. Scott. Dr. Magill, a lot has been said about some of 
the speakers that have been invited. Who invites the speakers?
    Ms. Magill. Congressman, it varies. It might be a student 
organization, it might be a faculty member, it might be a staff 
member. It might be my office.
    Mr. Scott. Does your office always control who the speakers 
are, what speakers are invited?
    Ms. Magill. No. There is no preapproval process for the 
speakers who are invited. It's quite decentralized.
    Mr. Scott. If some group, student group invited somebody 
that the university found offensive, what happens?
    Ms. Magill. Well, we do not prevent a speaker from coming 
to campus, following the guidance of the United States 
Constitutions, based on the views that we think they are going 
to express.
    We sometimes condemn those views if they are deeply 
inconsistent with our values. We do not censor or prevent 
speakers from coming based on their views, even if they are 
offensive.
    Mr. Scott. Dr. Gay, you said several students are 
participating--subject to disciplinary actions. Typically, how 
long does that disciplinary action take to be completed?
    Ms. Gay. The process, we try to move with all deliberate 
speed. It varies depending on the complexity of the incident. 
It could be a matter of days or weeks, or it could be a bit 
longer than that. The range of consequences vary, but up to and 
including expulsion from Harvard.
    Mr. Scott. Several comments have been made that the 
campuses are full of antisemitism and that is the only problem 
on campus. Can the university presidents comment on that?
    Ms. Gay. It is not the only problem on campus. It is 
particularly acute at this moment, and as I have mentioned 
before, students have offered searing testimony about what 
they've been experiencing. It is not just antisemitism. It is 
also Islamophobia and frankly just hostility to individuals who 
are visibly Muslim or Arab or Palestinian.
    Then we also have other student communities that feel 
marginalized, not just in this moment but have been struggling 
to feel a sense of belonging at Harvard for some years, 
including students of color.
    Mr. Scott. Ms. Magill.
    Ms. Magill. I would describe very much the same experience 
at the University of Pennsylvania, as Dr. Gay described.
    Mr. Scott. Dr. Kornbluth.
    Ms. Kornbluth. Racism, Islamophobia, anti-LGBTQ sentiment. 
One thing I might add about free speech on campus with these 
issues is that the best way to fight negative speech is more 
speech, to have speakers and individuals who fight antisemitism 
and can speak to our students on campus.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Yield back. Thank you, Dr. Foxx, and 
I want to thank our witnesses for participating in today's 
hearing. Protecting students from discrimination and harassment 
are central to fostering safe and welcoming campuses.
    Regrettably following the October 7th attacks, college 
campuses have experienced a disturbing rise in incidents of 
antisemitism and Islamophobia. It is great to have the 
opportunity to hear directly from campus leaders on what they 
are doing to be more proactive and prevent incidences of 
violence and harassment on campus.
    I applaud President Biden's leadership and the 
administration for actively helping institutions protect 
students as part of the White House's National Strategy to 
Combat Antisemitism.
    Under the President's direction, the Department of 
Education has provided additional guidance to colleges and 
universities on how to uphold their obligation under Title VI 
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and better address 
antisemitism, Islamophobia and other forms of discrimination on 
campus.
    We have already opened about 15 Title VI investigations in 
the recent incidences on campus since October 7th. Finally, as 
Members of Congress, we also have the responsibility to condemn 
discrimination as we see it, and we should fully fund the 
Office of Civil Rights, so that they will have the resources to 
investigate these cases. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield 
back.
    Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Chairman--Mr. Ranking 
Member. Postsecondary education has never been held in such low 
esteem in our country as it is today. Indeed, I do not refer to 
colleges and universities any longer as higher education, 
because it is my opinion that higher order skills are not being 
taught and learned.
    I think today's hearing indicates that. I think Mr. 
Williams was on to something in his line of questioning about 
why are we here--at this stage when you all talk about 
education being the answer to the problems.
    Now I want to remind everyone why we are here. I started 
the hearing by recognizing the students we have in the audience 
today. You are the ones bearing the brunt of the hate that is 
festering on our campuses. You are the reason we are calling 
attention to these issues, and we will continue holding college 
leaders accountable for failing to protect you.
    You are heroes, and I thank you for your courage. One of 
the students here today is Talia Khan. She is an undergraduate 
alumna of MIT, and currently a graduate student there. She 
wrote a letter to the Committee. I request unanimous consent to 
submit her full letter for the record. Without objection.
    [The letter of Mrs. Foxx follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Chairwoman Foxx. I encourage all the members to read it. 
Unfortunately, I do not have time to read the whole thing, but 
I want to give you a sample.
    ``I'm a Jewish student, the daughter of a Jewish mother and 
an Afghan-Muslim father. I'd like to bring to your attention my 
perspective as a Jewish student currently immersed in an 
extremely toxic atmosphere at MIT.''
    She goes on to describe a litany of violence, harassment 
and bullying against Jewish students on MIT's campus, and 
inaction by the MIT administration. She then concludes with a 
plea for help from the MIT administration. ``Unfortunately, I 
have been put in charge of working to keep MIT students feeling 
safe. I have been put in charge of advocating for hundreds of 
frightened students, afraid of retribution.
    ``I want to stop being told about the most recent 
antisemitic incident and feeling like I have to push and--push 
and push to report it, even though nothing ever gets done. This 
should not be my job. Sally Kornbluth, please let be a student 
again. It is your job to keep Jewish students safe, not mine.''
    Talia, thank you for sharing your ordeal with this 
Committee. Talia happens to be a student at MIT. Unfortunately, 
her story is not unique to that campus. Horrific acts of hate, 
violence and intimidation are happening at the University of 
Pennsylvania, Harvard and institutions all over the country, 
and institutional leaders are failing to meet the movement with 
courage, clarity or decisive action.
    I also ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a 
Wall Street Journal op-ed from this past Sunday by Lance 
Morrow. The op-ed is called ``The New Antisemitism is the 
Oldest Kind.'' Without objection.
    [The information of Mrs. Foxx follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Foxx. This op-ed is clear-eyed about the threat 
we face. Talking about the antisemitism of the post-war era, 
Morrow said ``America's antisemites in those days were more 
fools than monsters.'' Then he says ``The antisemitism that is 
poured forth onto the country's streets and campuses in the 
autumn of 2023 is a different thing. A reversion to a politics 
of aggressive, unapologetic hate.
    ``Of course, the new Jew haters, especially young people on 
campuses, think of themselves as perfectly virtuous. What is a 
thousand times worse, they think of their Jew hatred as 
righteous. It is morally fashionable among them.''
    This brings me back to the beginning. Presidents Gay, 
Magill and Kornbluth, you have real and important practical 
challenges. These are real students sitting here, and they need 
to be protected. You also have a moral challenge. It is 
fashionable among too many members of your campus communities 
to hate Jews. It is ideologically acceptable.
    As you do the practical work of protecting your campus, you 
must also do the rhetorical work of changing hearts and minds. 
That is your job as a campus president. That means being 
willing to risk your job to speak truth clearly, consistently 
and unapologetically, even when the Jew haters turn their hate 
to you.
    We will now be watching, and I genuinely hope for the sake 
of our Nation you will rise to meet the challenge. Without 
objection, there being no further business, the Committee 
stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
                                 [all]