[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE CRISIS ON CAMPUS:
ANTISEMITISM, RADICAL FACULTY, AND THE
FAILURE OF UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 13, 2024
__________
Serial No. 118-FC28
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
57-108 WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
JASON SMITH, Missouri, Chairman
VERN BUCHANAN, Florida RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts
ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania MIKE THOMPSON, California
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
DARIN LaHOOD, Illinois EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
BRAD WENSTRUP, Ohio BILL PASCRELL, Jr., New Jersey
JODEY ARRINGTON, Texas DANNY DAVIS, Illinois
DREW FERGUSON, Georgia LINDA SANCHEZ, California
RON ESTES, Kansas TERRI SEWELL, Alabama
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania SUZAN DelBENE, Washington
KEVIN HERN, Oklahoma JUDY CHU, California
CAROL MILLER, West Virginia GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin
GREG MURPHY, North Carolina DAN KILDEE, Michigan
DAVID KUSTOFF, Tennessee DON BEYER, Virginia
BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania DWIGHT EVANS, Pennsylvania
GREG STEUBE, Florida BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois
CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York JIMMY PANETTA, California
MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota JIMMY GOMEZ, California
BLAKE MOORE, Utah
MICHELLE STEEL, California
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas
RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
MIKE CAREY, Ohio
Mark Roman, Staff Director
Brandon Casey, Minority Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Hon. Jason Smith, Missouri, Chairman............................. 1
Hon. Richard Neal, Massachusetts, Ranking Member................. 2
Advisory of June 13, 2024 announcing the hearing................. V
WITNESSES
Talia Dror, Student, Cornell University.......................... 5
Shai Davidai, Assistant Professor of Business, Columbia Business
School......................................................... 10
Dr. Jonathan Pidluzny, Ph.D., Director, Higher Education Reform,
America First Policy Institute................................. 20
Hon. Kenneth L. Marcus, Founder & Chairman, Louis D. Brandeis
Center for Human Rights Under Law.............................. 33
Hon. Ted Deutch, Chief Executive Officer, American Jewish
Committee...................................................... 46
MEMBER QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
Member Questions for the Record and Responses from Shai Davidai,
Assistant Professor of Business, Columbia Business School...... 192
PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Public Submissions............................................... 195
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
THE CRISIS ON CAMPUS:
ANTISEMITISM, RADICAL FACULTY, AND THE
FAILURE OF UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 2024
House of Representatives,
Committee on Ways and Means,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:49 a.m. in Room
1100, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Jason T. Smith
[chairman of the committee] presiding.
Chairman SMITH. The committee will come to order.
Following Hamas's horrific October 7 terrorist attack on
Israel, antisemitism raged across the world, including on
America's college campuses. This committee moved swiftly to
investigate the spike in hate by holding a hearing just a few
weeks after the attack.
Over the last eight months Americans have seen how the
inaction of university leaders emboldened anti-Israel, anti-
Jew, and anti-American radicals on college campuses. That
inaction resulted in encampments springing up at many of
America's so-called elite universities, and brought education
at those institutions to a grinding halt. Students, faculty,
and outside agitators stormed campus buildings and blocked
entrances. Classes were disrupted or moved online. Long-awaited
graduation ceremonies were canceled.
Following this committee's hearing in November we launched
an investigation into several universities regarding their
handling of violence and harassment of Jewish students on their
campuses. The universities under investigation all failed to
root out antisemitism and protect Jewish students on their
campuses. The committee continues to receive evidence and
firsthand accounts that schools are ignoring the concerns of
Jewish students, failing to enforce campus policies, and
refusing to discipline students found to have violated
university rules and codes of conduct.
Just a few examples of such failures include the failure of
MIT to discipline students who violated campus policies simply
because they were not Americans and were here on student visas;
the failure of Harvard to listen to the recommendations of its
antisemitism advisory group, even though the committee
identified ways Jewish students were being harassed; the
failure of Cornell to enforce real discipline on campus
agitators who violated campus policies by repeatedly disrupting
basic educational functions, including class and exams; the
failure of Penn to take meaningful disciplinary action against
students and faculty who violated campus policies, including
one student who stole an Israeli flag from a campus apartment
and the Faculty for Justice in Palestine blocking the entrance
to campus.
The committee's investigation has identified three key
areas of concern: first is the fact that weak university
leadership has repeatedly failed to protect students and focus
on its actual mission of educating students; second is the role
that radical faculty are playing in fueling and, in some cases,
taking part in violations of campus policy and law, on top of
teaching concepts that fuel antisemitism and hatred; lastly,
there is the role that international students are playing in
antisemitic and dangerous protests on college campuses across
the country.
Our investigation continues. But based on the evidence
already gathered, we can easily see that many universities are
failing their students by turning a blind eye to antisemitism.
Instead, they are caving to the demands of loud, hateful, and
destructive detractors, often to the detriment of student
safety, coursework, class time, and academic success on campus.
That is no way to fulfill an educational mission.
I am glad that Speaker Johnson called for a collective
House investigation to bolster this committee's effort that
started in November. House Republicans will continue to press
universities to fulfill their tax-exempt purpose by changing
course to regain control of campuses.
To the universities listening: If you think we will lose
focus, interest, or forget about this, you couldn't be more
wrong. We will continue to use the tools of the Ways and Means
Committee to protect Americans on college campuses from danger
until university administrators grow a spine and start doing
their job.
I want to thank each of our witnesses for being here, and I
look forward to learning more about what is occurring on
college campuses today, and how the situation has evolved since
the hearing in November.
Chairman SMITH. I am pleased to recognize Ranking Member
Neal for his opening statement.
Mr. NEAL. Thank you. I want to thank our witnesses for
being here this morning, and especially a warm welcome to our
former colleague and my friend, former Congressman Ted Deutch.
And congratulations to Talia for her graduation, as well.
At the outset, I think it is fair to say that we all
condemn antisemitism. Since our last hearing we are saddened
that the hateful actions and rhetoric that has too often
targeted Jewish students has continued. These incidents have
disrupted campuses, leaving too many questioning safety.
Universities certainly have a responsibility to cultivate safe
and supportive learning environments, and today we are going to
hear what has happened in the spring, and consider
recommendations to combat antisemitism on campuses this fall.
Some of today's witnesses may blame campus antisemitism on
DEI programs. I do not agree. Celebrating and learning from our
differences is how we become a more inclusive nation while
combating some of the biggest threats. The idea here should
remain part of the universal form called unity without
uniformity.
The Biden Administration has been hard at work to help our
campuses, announcing multiple actions to address reported
antisemitic incidents at our schools and our college campuses,
including the role of DHS and DoJ as they engage with state,
local, and campus law enforcement. The Administration has also
updated the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights
Discrimination Complaints to process and specify that there are
certain forms of antisemitism and Islamophobia that are
prohibited under title 6 of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Our
universities, I anticipate, will take this summer to prepare
for what comes next.
Americans are counting on the continuation of free thought,
and at the same time the safety of students on our college
campuses. We need to meet the moment with great care,
thoughtfulness, and vigilance. Fighting antisemitism and,
indeed, all hate should remain a priority, not to miss the
point that there was ugly strains of religious bigotry
throughout American history, including the role that the Know
Nothings played in opposition to immigration more than a
century ago. Denouncing bigotry in all forms is an American
value, and that is one that we must carry forward from here
today.
Mr. NEAL. Let me yield the balance of my time to a
gentleman who has exhibited, I think, great sound temperament
and advice to the committee, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr.
Schneider.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you, Ranking Member Neal, and welcome.
I will take the privilege to also welcome my dear friend,
former colleague, Ted Deutch, and make note of the piece of
tape on your lapel that says 251 days since the hostages were
captured.
And to Talia, I extend congratulations to you and your
family on graduation, graduation from Columbia, which has been
at the center of much of what we are talking about today, and
it is not surprising. It is not something that happened
overnight at Columbia. It is an issue that has festered there
for a very long time, but was accelerated following October 7,
and we will talk more about that today.
What should every young person be able to rightly expect
when attending college or university, often leaving the safety
of their home communities for the first time? To be educated,
to learn the lessons and skills to prepare for a successful,
fulfilling career and life. To be intellectually challenged,
including having some of their core beliefs, their most closely
held truths, proven wrong. But also, to be safe, in their
person and their spirit, in their ability to learn and grow, to
step out of their comfort zones and expand their horizons.
What we have seen on campuses across the country since
October 7 is an explosion of antisemitism, often in its most
vile forms, specifically targeting Jewish students under the
guise of anti-Israel or anti-Zionist protest. According to the
ADL, we saw a nearly 400 percent increase in antisemitic
incidents in just the first few months after October 7, and the
rate only accelerated in the spring as the weather improved and
the protesters moved to occupy campuses.
To be clear, being anti-Israel is not necessarily
antisemitic, any more than being opposed to the policies of any
other country or government. However, delegitimizing Jews'
aspiration for a state in their national homeland, a land in
which Jews have continuously lived for 3,500 years, is
absolutely antisemitism. Excluding Jewish, Israeli, and pro-
Israeli students from classrooms, public spaces, and
organizational activities on campus is antisemitism.
Vandalizing the homes, offices, or rooms of Jewish
administrators, faculties, or students is antisemitism.
Our colleges and universities should be safe places for
learning and growth, not hotbeds of hate and discrimination.
Too many Jewish students on campus have been targeted as
individuals and collectively.
This is not about free speech. I will defend everyone's
right to stand at the Rock at Northwestern, or Harvard Yard, or
the quad, or the center of any school and express their views.
But when speech crosses over into hate, to intimidation, to
exclusion or isolation, it is imperative that school leaders,
including university presidents but also faculty and even
student governments and student leaders, recognize that hate
has no place on their campus.
Every student, irrespective of religion, nationality, or
ideology, must feel safe, and we expect our universities to
ensure that they do.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Before I begin I want to take a moment and acknowledge Dr.
Murphy, and also Mr. Evans, both valued members of our
committee that are not with us because they are both recovering
from treatments and procedures, and we will continue to keep
them in our prayers, and we look forward to both of them coming
back to our committee very soon.
I will now introduce our witnesses.
One of the witnesses from our November hearing, Ms. Talia
Dror, is back today to update us on how the environment on her
college campus, Cornell University, has worsened. To her
credit, despite the sad circumstances on campus, she graduated
college a few weeks ago. And on behalf of the entire committee
I would like to extend our congratulations and welcome you
back.
We have Professor Shai Davidai.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Shai Davidai.
Chairman SMITH. Shai Davidai. Is that--well, it is closer.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Like the adjective, shy.
Chairman SMITH. I am going to call you Professor.
[Laughter.]
Professor. He is an assistant professor of business at
Columbia Business School.
We have Dr. Jonathan Pidluzny, who is the director of
higher education reform at America First Policy Institute.
We have the honorable Kenneth L. Marcus, who is the founder
and chairman at Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under
Law.
And we have the honorable and former colleague, Mr. Ted
Deutch.
Welcome back to the House.
He is the chief executive officer at American Jewish
Community.
Thank you all for joining us today. Your written statements
will be made part of the hearing record, and you each have five
minutes to deliver your remarks.
Ms. Dror, you may begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF TALIA DROR, CURRENT STUDENT AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY
AND VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE, CORNELLIANS FOR ISRAEL
Ms. DROR. Chairman Smith, Ranking member Neal, and members
of the Ways and Means Committee, thank you for inviting me back
to testify today. My name is Talia Dror. I am a recent graduate
of Cornell University.
Seven months ago I described how, directly after the
October 7 attacks, my campus erupted in celebration. I
explained how the antisemitic environment fostered by pro-Hamas
students, professors, and administrators led to a Cornell
student threatening to bomb our kosher dining hall and
slaughter every Jew on our campus. I am here today to tell you
that, since then, blatant violations of Cornell's code of
conduct continue, appeased and rewarded by my university.
Now these violations have been exposed for what they truly
are: expressions not just of Jew hatred, but of a burning
hatred for the United States itself. In December students
occupied our main building, vandalizing it with genocidal
slogans and hoisting a Palestinian flag on an American
flagpole.
In January, student protesters chanted, ``Houthis, Houthis,
make us proud, turn another ship around.'' The Houthis are a
U.S.-designated terrorist organization whose slogan reads,
``God is great, death to America, death to Israel, curse on the
Jews, victory to Islam.''
Throughout the month of February, protesters held weekly
die-ins. I was in the library during the first die-in. I
watched as hundreds of masked students lay on the floor and
began chanting antisemitic slogans. As I watched alongside
visibly disturbed students, I saw an administrator just
standing there and watching, doing nothing to enforce Cornell's
policies. A Jewish freshman who was studying there recognized
me and began sobbing in my arms.
As I held this girl, whose name I did not even know, I
realized the gravity of the moment: Cornell's administration
has made a decision to protect hateful radicals at the expense
of everyone else.
In the following weeks, Cornell's policy of appeasement
resulted in classes constantly being canceled and exams needing
to be moved as the pro-Hamas group wreaked havoc.
Anti-American students stifle intellectual disagreement by
threatening anyone who does not conform to their orthodoxy. On
March 3, a Jewish student was accosted by a fellow student who
approached her and yelled, ``F'ing Zionist scum. Yes, I have
seen you around, Genocidaire. God forbid a Zionist feel
unsafe.'' The university's investigation has been open for over
three months now, with no resolution in sight.
On March 29, a member of Cornell's student government
refused to allow pro-Hamas students to break election rules.
That night a student told him that he had better watch his
back, and that he would regret ever joining the student
assembly.
This should come as no surprise, as the administration not
only allows these incidents to occur, it promotes the
antisemitic ideology fueling them. As part of their education
series on antisemitism and Islamophobia, the university
sponsored a lecture by Sahar Aziz, who is currently being
investigated by both the U.S. House and Senate for espousing
vile, antisemitic propaganda.
Cornell has also platformed a vocal pro-Hamas student who
referred to Jewish students as ``bloodthirsty Zionists only
satiated by the blood of Palestinians,'' and claims that he
does not take his cue from the Cornell Student Assembly, but
rather from the armed resistance in Palestine, referring to
Hamas. Next year this student will be teaching an introductory
course for incoming freshmen.
On April 25, Cornell students formed an encampment,
blatantly violating the code of conduct. In-campers chanted
phrases like, ``There is only one solution, intifada
revolution,'' a call to kill Jews worldwide. Three weeks later,
when the encampment was dismantled, the university issued a
statement expressing gratitude that the students terrorizing
campus somehow restrained themselves from physically carrying
out their violent sentiments. All the administration had to do
was enforce its existing rules. Instead, it chose to negotiate
with the protesters, grant them immunity, and thank them for
their self-restraint. The message was very clear: Rules are
meaningless and lawlessness is rewarded.
Let me be very clear. The hostile environment I have just
described to you pervades campuses all across the country, from
Harvard to UC Santa Barbara, from UCLA to Yale. American
universities have allowed themselves to be controlled by
vicious chants, rule-breaking, and anarchy. If they wish to
continue benefitting from government funding, they must start
upholding American values, rather than bowing to those who wish
to see this country burn. My tuition has subsidized the
indoctrination a generation that hates our country. It would be
a disgrace for even one more taxpayer dollar to do the same.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
[The statement of Ms. Dror follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Professor Davidai, you are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF SHAI DAVIDAI, PH.D., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF
BUSINESS, COLUMBIA BUSINESS SCHOOL
Mr. DAVIDAI. My name is Shai Davidai. I am an assistant
professor at Columbia Business School.
Since October 7, when Hamas raped, tortured, slaughtered,
and kidnaped more than 1,400 of my people, Columbia's campus
has been a hostile environment for Jews and Israelis like me.
Over the past months, Jewish students have locked themselves in
dorms to avoid being assaulted. They have been spat on,
attacked, bullied, vilified, chased, and told to keep F'ing
running. This is not an exaggeration. This is the reality of
what it is like being Jewish and Israeli at Columbia since
October 7.
For more than eight months, Columbia University has refused
to deal with the student organizations whose leaders and
members have, among other things, publicly supported Hamas, the
PFLP, and the Islamic Jihad; illegally occupied public spaces
on campus from which they denied entry to Jewish and Israeli
students; violently took over a university building and held an
employee hostage against his will; chanted in support of the
Houthis, a terrorist organization whose flag calls for death to
Israel, death to America, and a curse upon the Jews; called for
the extermination of Israel; called for Zionists to be killed;
called for rockets to be shot at Tel Aviv; supported the
Islamic Republic of Iran in its attack on Israeli civilian
targets; harassed a rabbi who was escorting Jewish students to
safety; hosted the wife of a man convicted of providing
material support to Hamas; amplified calls by Hamas for
violence in Jerusalem; set up memorials for convicted
terrorists on campus; called on the military wing of Hamas to
attack Jewish-American students; and invited speakers with
known ties to terrorist organizations to an event in support of
terrorism.
Everything I have just noted is well documented and known
to the university leaders, yet there are two Columbias, a
Columbia in theory and a Columbia in practice.
In theory, Columbia suspended two organizations and a
handful of their leaders for their pro-terror activity. In
practice, these suspensions were never enforced, and they
continue to organize on campus without interruptions.
In theory, Columbia has stated that pro-terror campus
protests are unauthorized. In practice, the university has
never dispersed even a single protest.
In theory, Columbia cares about the safety of its Jewish
and Israeli students. In practice, it doesn't.
Minouche Shafik, Jerry Rosberg, Cass Holloway, and Phyllis
Rosen have all personally allowed these organizations to
terrorize Jewish, Israeli--and Israeli students with complete
impunity. They must be held accountable.
Yet these individuals are just the tip of the iceberg. We
must hold accountable the entire administration and the board
of trustees. We must hold accountable the faculty who openly
support and celebrate terrorism: Professor Joseph Massad, who
expressed his jubilation and awe at the massacre, rape,
torture, and kidnaping of Israeli civilians; Professor Mohamed
Abdou, who openly supports terrorism, stating that he is with
the resistance, be it Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad;
Professor Katherine Franke, who has justified terrorist attacks
against Israel and has claimed that Israelis are a danger on
campus; Professor Rashid Khalidi, who was reportedly the
spokesperson for the PLO when it was still an active terrorist
organization, and who has legitimized Hamas and Islamic Jihad
as resistance fighters; Professor Mahmood Mamdani, who has
called for the dismantling of the Jewish state; and Professors
Asim Ansari and Kamel Jedidi of Columbia Business School, who,
along with many other professors, signed a letter minimizing
the massacre, rape, and kidnaping of civilians as merely a
military response.
These professors receive millions of dollars in Federal
funding for their research and teaching.
These professors teach the next generation of American
doctors, lawyers, teachers, leaders, and social workers.
These are the professors with whom American parents entrust
their kids' safety.
This is why I am here. I am here to speak up for every
decent American who believes that antisemitism and support for
terrorism have no place on campus.
I am here to speak up for every person, Jewish or non-
Jewish, who believes that rape is never, never, never okay.
I am here to speak up for the future of higher education.
Yes, I have had--I have paid a price, a personal price for
speaking up. But I would rather pay the price for speaking up
than the price for staying silent.
Let me be clear. This is not about politics. The terrorists
who kidnaped Keith Seigel, an American from North Carolina, did
not stop to ask him who he voted for in the previous elections.
The professors who called the kidnaping of Omer Neutra, an
American from Long Island, ``a military response'' do not care
about his geopolitics. The students who desecrate pictures of
Hersh Goldberg-Polin, an American who had his arm blown off
before being kidnaped into Gaza, do not care about his views on
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is not about politics.
This is about hate, hate for Israel, hate for the Jewish
people's right for self-determination, and hate for America and
all that it stands for.
Like the U.S. Congress, I and many others have been asleep
at the wheel for too long. It is time to take action. It is
time to wake up. Thank you very much.
[The statement of Mr. Davidai follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Doctor.
Dr. Pidluzny, you are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF JONATHAN PIDLUZNY, PH.D., DIRECTOR, HIGHER
EDUCATION REFORM, AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Neal, and
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today. It is a real privilege.
I direct the Higher Education Reform Initiative at the
America First Policy Institute. Prior to joining AFPI, I was
vice president of academic affairs at the American Council of
Trustees and Alumni. I began my career on a public university
campus, and spent 10 great years teaching political science in
Kentucky.
What has happened on U.S. campuses since the Hamas massacre
should shake us to the core. It is not just that the hatred is
deep in the places where we train tomorrow's leaders.
University administrators have reacted to violent displays of
antisemitism with indifference to their Jewish students' well-
being.
Perhaps most surprising of all, the worst of the violence
and harassment has occurred at the country's wealthiest and its
most prestigious institutions. This matters for many reasons,
not least because our elite universities shape the broader
public culture. What happens on campus today will radiate
through American society, reshaping attitudes for years to
come.
With my time today I would like to explore some of the
reasons I think the hatred is most pronounced at elite
universities. There are three main drivers of campus
antisemitism, in my view: anti-Zionist faculty; radical
students and the pro-Hamas student groups they lead; and the
diversity, equity, and inclusion programs that now suffuse
higher education. I would like to focus on DEI, because it is
the atmospheric cause, the ideas in the air that dispose young
people to find antisemitic faculty and students so compelling.
DEI is not about ensuring that under-prepared students have
the support they need to succeed in educational programs that
promise a high return on investment. Universities should
actually be doing more of that. DEI's real priorities are drawn
from critical race theory. The goal is to use the university to
reengineer American society away from its aspirational ideals:
equality before the law, equal treatment according to
individual merit.
Instead, DEI pushes relentlessly for equity, equal
outcomes, and to dismantle ``systemic oppression'' by making
race and identity central to everything we do and everything we
think. As such, DEI teaches that the world is made up of
oppressors and the oppressed, victims and those with privilege.
This divisive ideology primes students to make snap judgments
about each other based on skin color and identity group
stereotypes.
Jews are coded as the oppressors by virtue of their
political and economic success. This is what creates a kind of
permission structure for students to join in with the true
radicals cheering for the Hamas terrorists who deliberately
kill children and rape hostages.
Major universities spend tens of millions of dollars each
year on DEI, and their armies number in the hundreds. This
helps to explain why antisemitism is more pronounced on elite
campuses. They have been funding what drives it for over a
decade.
Four points in closing will give perspective on how this
relates to higher education finance.
First, of the 12 wealthiest private universities by
endowment value, 11 had antisemitic encampments or arrests. In
2022 Harvard's endowment hit 53 billion. Columbia's topped 14.
The 300 private schools with endowments valued at more than
$100,000 per student together control well over a half-trillion
dollars, war chests that receive supremely favorable tax
treatment.
Second, elite universities receive billions in Federal
grants and contracts every year. To be sure, these programs
fund important research. But universities also receive indirect
cost reimbursements as high as 69 percent on top of the
programs funded. That is unrestricted revenue that can be spent
on other priorities. In 2022 Columbia took in $1.2 billion in
Federal grants and contracts. And again, all but 1 of the top
12 private university recipients of Federal grants saw
antisemitic arrests or encampments this spring.
Third, foreign money has been flowing to elite universities
for decades. In recent years the sums have been enormous: for
example, 1.8 billion since 2014 for Cornell, and that is just
from Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Last, elite universities enroll thousands of foreign
students who generally pay full freight. It only takes a small
number to spark violent and menacing protests. Our analysis
revealed that, out of the 111 universities with antisemitic
encampments and/or arrests this year, 20 have student bodies
consisting of more than 20 percent foreign students; 13
campuses surpassed 25 percent.
In conclusion, the spasms of hate that have convulsed elite
universities demonstrate that existing accountability
structures are insufficient. Immense public investment in
higher education rightly makes this an important subject for
congressional oversight. It also gives the Congress several
powerful policy levers to affect positive change. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Pidluzny follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Mr. Marcus.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. KENNETH L. MARCUS, FORMER TRUMP APPOINTEE
AS U.S. SECRETARY OF EDUCATION FOR CIVIL RIGHTS, FOUNDER AND
CHAIRMAN OF THE LOUIS D. BRANDEIS CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS UNDER
LAW
Mr. MARCUS. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Neal,
distinguished members of the committee, thank you for inviting
me to join you. I am Kenneth L. Marcus, chairman of the Louis
Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and former assistant
secretary of education for civil rights.
Over the last 20 years I have been fighting antisemitism on
college campuses, but never seen anything like what we have
experienced since October 7. Even in the year prior to October
7, we saw record levels of antisemitism on college campuses. In
the three weeks following October 7 we saw as many incidents
reported to us as in the prior record-breaking year.
Over the time since then, and in particular since this
committee had its last hearing, what we have seen is a
spreading of the extreme and violent situation on a handful of
campuses throughout this country. While there are elite
institutions such as Harvard and Berkeley that have been in the
news, the fact is that we are seeing problems even at
institutions that had previously seen none of them. We are
seeing a kind of perfect storm of student violent extremism,
professorial politicization, undisclosed foreign funding, and
often feckless and weak administration. This is happening all
over the country to the extent that I would say it is a crisis
that needs to be dealt with.
Most of these institutions are tax exempt, and need to be
held accountable if they do not meet the requirements of their
tax-exempt status. That is true of the universities, and also
of some of the organizations that have been fomenting hatred.
My former agency, the U.S. Department of Education's Office
for Civil Rights, has a central role in addressing this campus
antisemitism. During this Administration they have done some
things right. The National Strategy from the White House raised
awareness of the issue. There has been transparency and also, I
would say, a number of cases open, some of them in a timely
manner.
At the same time, we have seen no significant policy
advances. We have seen extremely slow enforcement of campus
antisemitism cases. We have seen tools available to the agency
that are not being used, such as the possibility of proactive
compliance reviews, proactive agency-directed investigations,
the possibility of joint investigations by OCR and the
Department of Justice, which has been used in prior
administrations and could be used here. Lots of different tools
that are available that aren't being used, and we would like to
see that changed.
Beyond that, beyond that, we have seen good cases being
dismissed in ways that appear to deviate from the law. For
example, cases that are being dismissed under rule 110(h) of
the OCR manual, which allows dismissal in some class actions,
but which has been used for dismissals in some non-class action
cases. In other words, we are not seeing the sort of
enforcement that we would like to see.
In fairness, the Education Department doesn't have all of
the tools that it could use. While it does have the ability to
deny all foreign--all Federal funds to an institution, that is
a remedy that is not necessarily sufficient because it is used
so rarely, if ever at all. It would certainly be helpful if
additional remedies were available to address recalcitrant
institutions that permitted hostile environments.
This House of Representatives did good work when it passed
the Antisemitism Awareness Act. The fact is that one of the
greatest problems for universities, and also for the Federal
Government, is an inability to determine when incidents can be
considered antisemitism and when they aren't. The Antisemitism
Awareness Act, if enacted into law, would be a big step.
But there are other problems that are still unaddressed.
One of the most disturbing problems that we have seen is that
when Jewish students try to report antisemitism through
university grievance programs, they often face retaliation.
They are often accused of other sorts of incidents, and those
accusations are taken seriously. Retaliatory claims and
counterclaims have to be addressed, as well.
Beyond that, we need to look at joint compliance, national
initiatives, and investigation into those groups that have at
least the appearance of potentially advancing terrorism. Any
university that has a student organization that has indicated a
potential support for terrorism should be investigating it. And
to the extent that isn't happening, it should be done by the
United States Federal Government.
Given the importance of tax-exempt status for institutions
that receive it, I think that it is entirely welcome that this
committee is looking into this issue, and that there is room
for strengthening the protections that we have for our
students.
I thank this committee for its attention, and thank you for
including me in this hearing.
[The statement of Mr. Marcus follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Congressman Deutch, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. THEODORE ``TED'' DEUTCH, FORMER U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE (FL-22), CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AMERICAN
JEWISH COMMITTEE
Mr. DEUTCH. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Neal, members of
the committee, it is an honor to be before you to testify in
this body, where I served alongside many of you for seven
terms. Today I am here in my capacity as CEO of American Jewish
Committee, on the heels of our global forum, where 2,000 Jewish
leaders, including hundreds of young leaders from around the
world, convened.
And what is happening on university campuses in the United
States is the threat that everyone from all of the 55 countries
represented expects us to confront, because our Jewish students
and faculty are on the front lines of the battle against
dangerous antisemitism.
Protests in the weeks after 10/7 featured students and
faculty celebrating terror, unapologetically declaring Hamas's
barbarity to be exhilarating and glorious and liberating.
Over winter break, the Jewish community held its collective
breath, hoping the temperature would be turned down on college
campuses. Instead, we witnessed a doubling down in the spring,
as Talia and Shai both spoke powerfully to. Radical anti-Israel
protesters commandeered campus quads, occupied university
buildings, fomenting vile, antisemitic messaging and creating
an atmosphere of harassment, intimidation, and fear for Jewish
students, faculty, and staff, and disrupting normal campus
activities for all campus citizens, Jewish and non-Jewish
alike.
Students have been forced to walk a gauntlet on college
campuses, finding alternative pathways to classes, dining
halls, libraries just to stay safe. They have watched as campus
events featuring Israeli speakers were canceled or moved to
secret, out-of-the-way hiding spots, and they have had classes
moved online because it was no longer safe for them to be on
campus. And the response of many university presidents and
chancellors to these events has been woefully inadequate, and
completely lacking in leadership.
Jewish life on campus became narrowed, relegated to dark
corners, while lawless protesters took center stage, and were
allowed to remain there, despite pushing past every margin of
acceptable conduct. In some cases, these radical individuals
were granted a seat at the table with university boards as a
reward for their blatant disregard of the rules.
It should not come as a surprise that this school year
shook to the core the Jewish community's trust in institutions
of higher learning. University leaders must use these summer
months to confront this problem that risk permanently staining
the reputations of our country's top academic institutions, and
they must disabuse themselves of the notion that everything
will return to normal in the coming year. Accepting
antisemitism as normal is what helped get us to this place, and
the news from just the past few days confirms that the threats
to the Jewish community are increasing, and we know that
colleges are not immune.
Last weekend, down the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue
near the White House, protesters held signs, screamed, and
defaced statues with, ``Stand with Hamas, Kill Another Zionist
Now,'' calls for jihad and death to America.
On Monday in New York, a mob celebrated the Hamas murder of
over 360 people at the Nova Music Festival.
On Tuesday a masked group boarded a New York subway car and
shouted, ``Raise your hands if you are a Zionist.'' Masked
people on a subway asking, ``Raise your hand if you are a
Zionist, this is your chance to get out.''
And also this week, homes of Jewish employees and
leadership of the Brooklyn Museum were vandalized with signs
saying, ``White Supremacist, Zionist.''
Every member of this committee should be sickened by this.
Every member of this committee should say so publicly. This
antisemitic and anti-American incitement to violence can no
longer be tolerated. It must be stopped before it leads to real
violence.
Is it any wonder that AJC's most recent state of
antisemitism in America shows that 78 percent of American Jews
feel less safe since the attacks of 10/7? In our work with
administrators and included in our tool kit for university
leadership, AJC emphasizes initiatives to address antisemitism
head on so that it doesn't become permanent, which it will
unless we assertively counter it with a strong, coordinated,
multi-pronged approach.
With this in mind, we recommend that schools update their
codes of conduct and actually enforce their own rules; include
antisemitism education and training for their entire
communities; return to centers of fact-based exchange; ensure
the physical safety of Jewish students; and university
presidents should announce that they will open title 6
compliance offices, much like they have title 9 offices.
Congress has passed--the House has passed the Antisemitism
Awareness Act, and I encourage you to support and pass the
Countering Antisemitism Awareness Act, which would help
strengthen Federal efforts to counter antisemitism, including
higher education.
There are students in your districts being told that their
identity as Jews and Zionists is putting their safety at risk.
Listen to them. Use your important role as a member of the U.S.
House to help them.
In closing, please remember antisemitism is not just a
threat to the Jewish community; it is a threat to our
democracy. This moment is not just about antisemitism. It is
about the society that we want to live in. We must hold schools
accountable. We must protect all students, and we must work
together in a bipartisan fashion and declare zero tolerance for
antisemitism. We have seen throughout the history of the Jewish
people where antisemitism can lead. Now is the time. Act with
the urgency this moment demands.
Thank you for inviting me back to the House for this very
important hearing.
[The statement of Mr. Deutch follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman SMITH. Thank you for your testimony. We will now
move to questions.
Ms. Dror, you testified before our committee during the
past fall semester about your experience with violent threats,
harassment, and other antisemitic behavior on Cornell's campus.
You recalled being terrified, knowing that, as an outspoken
Jewish leader, you could likely be identified and targeted by
anyone seeking to do harm. Did you feel the same way during the
spring semester that you just completed?
Ms. DROR. Thank you, Chairman Smith.
Thankfully, there were no more expressed death threats
against Jewish students this semester. But watching the
widespread acceptance and normalization of antisemitism kind of
created a different type of fear in me. Watching myself and
fellow Jewish students begin to develop an it-could-be-worse
mentality--we could be getting stabbed in the eye, like my
friend, Sahar, at Yale did, or be told that we deserve to go
back to Poland, like my friend, Shai, did--I began to realize
how dangerous it is to become desensitized to this form of
bigotry and hatred.
Chairman SMITH. Professor Davidai, many of us here have
heard about what happened on Columbia University's campus this
spring. I am happy that you are here with us today so we can
hear firsthand from a member of the faculty about what has been
going on at Columbia, including the unauthorized encampment,
which resulted in police arresting over 100 Columbia students.
What do you think are the main factors that led students to
feel emboldened to essentially take over Columbia's campus?
Mr. DAVIDAI. Thank you so much. That is a great question. I
would say that there are two main factors.
One is a complete lack of leadership and accountability
from the administration. The student organizations and their
leaders have seen that they can do whatever they want with
complete impunity; that when they break the laws they will--the
university will send out a strong email, but will not follow
it; when they get suspended, nothing actually is enforced; that
they can hold an unauthorized protest and won't be dispersed;
that they can basically spew out hate, antisemitism, and pro-
terror rhetoric, and nothing will happen to them.
And the second factor is the faculty. There have been many
faculty who have not only indoctrinated these students and
egged them on to keep going, like Professor Katherine Franke,
but many faculty who actually defended with their bodies to
stop police enforcement of the illegal encampment.
So when you have a mixture of pro-Hamas, pro-Islamic jihad
faculty and an administration that shows no leadership and no
accountability, that is what you get.
Chairman SMITH. So I think it is safe to say, based on your
answer there, that Columbia has not been living up to its
obligations to its students and fulfilling its educational
purpose.
Mr. DAVIDAI. I would say that it even--didn't even pretend
to live up. It is not that Columbia can't; it is that Columbia
won't.
Chairman SMITH. Columbia won't. And the professors you
listed in your opening statement, that is extremely, extremely
disturbing. Thank you.
Mr. Marcus, part of today's hearing is to see what, if
anything, Congress can or should do to hold schools accountable
and protect students on campus. For this committee that
includes considering whether colleges and universities are
complying with section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code and
fulfilling their tax-exempt purpose. For other committees, that
also may mean looking at Title VI and the Department of
Education's process for resolving these types of complaints.
Based on your experience, do you think it would be helpful
if federal agencies had additional tools to use when
investigating colleges and universities for alleged violations
of anti-discrimination laws?
And are there any policy solutions Congress should
consider?
Mr. MARCUS. Yes, Chairman Smith, thank you. I do think that
additional remedies are necessary.
There is the possibility of lawsuits, but those are
expensive and lengthy.
The current process at OCR is also somewhat cumbersome, and
seldom leads to the sort of resolution that really would
require fundamental change. Nor is the OCR system necessarily
built for the sort of crisis that we have today.
So for those institutions that are recalcitrant in the face
of growing antisemitism to which they have shown something like
deliberate indifference, I think a more streamlined, quicker
process that could lead to issues with respect to tax-exempt
status would be a welcome addition to the remedies that are now
at play.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you. I would like to recognize the
ranking member, Mr. Neal, for questions.
Mr. NEAL. Thank you.
Mr. Deutch, I will give you a chance to answer the same
questions that were just offered to Mr. Marcus, and give you an
opportunity to discuss safety on campus, what suggestions you
would make to take action against antisemitism beyond the
universal condemnation that you have heard.
And perhaps you could talk a bit about your recommendations
for integrating antisemitism training in many of our
institutions.
Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you. Thank you, Ranking Member Neal.
First of all, in response to the question about what can
Congress do, the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of
Education needs additional resources that--the challenges that
we have all described are so great, we want and expect the
Office of Civil Rights to take necessary action to begin
investigations promptly and, most importantly, to complete them
promptly so that accountability can actually be brought to
bear. They need additional resources so that they can do that.
I mentioned, as well, the Countering Antisemitism Act.
There are two ways to address antisemitism. One is to identify
it, and Congress passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act because
identifying antisemitism is important. That is what the IHRA
definition does. It is why AJC has worked to pass it so many
places around the world and around the United States. And it is
what that bill does, and I hope that the Senate will pass that,
as well.
The Countering Antisemitism Act strengthens Federal efforts
beyond that. Once we have identified antisemitism, we should
have greater resources. There should be someone in the White
House going forward in every administration that is focused on
this issue. Same at the Department of Education. That is what
that bill, H.R. 7921, does. And I encourage members to look at
it, to cosponsor it. And ultimately, I hope the Speaker will
bring it up so that it can pass.
In terms of safety on campus, there are different steps
that the universities can take. But first and foremost--and I
think we all agree, and we have heard different versions of
this--the campus administration has to enforce its own rules.
The code of conduct on its campus has to be updated. Some of
the codes of--student codes of conduct were written so long ago
they don't even acknowledge the existence of social media, they
don't acknowledge the current world that we live in. They
should be revised for the benefit of not just Jewish students,
but for the community as a whole.
And then they need to be enforced. There need to be
repercussions when those rules are violated, and that stands in
stark contrast to what we have seen on some campuses, where the
violation of those rules has actually been rewarded. That is an
important step.
And universities need--beyond that, they need to be very
clear in ensuring--and this is, I am sure, a conversation that
will take place over the course of this day--there needs to be
viewpoint of diversity on campus. When you allow one group to
completely silence another--the harassment and intimidation of
Jewish students, of Israeli students is meant to silence them.
And universities have a role to play in ensuring that, if they
intend the university to live up to its ideals as a place where
a free exchange of ideas can actually take place, then you have
to actually hear all voices, and you can't silence--you can't
allow one group to silence the voices that they disagree with
and--in this case, that they literally--they violently disagree
with. That is an important step that has to be taken.
And there is a responsibility--I will just finish, Ranking
Member Neal, with the faculty, as well. There are--the
challenges that exist with the faculty, the way that faculty on
some campuses conduct themselves in ways even in violation of
the guidelines on academic freedom that the American Academy of
University Professors sets out, winds up doing damage, again,
to the ultimate goals of the university, which is to be a place
where there can be a free exchange of ideas.
That has to be tackled seriously, and this has to be done
over not just the coming semester, but this is something that
universities need to focus on over the coming years, and it
starts with university presidents who set the right tone, who
speak with moral clarity, who understand that what is happening
at this moment when there are protesters supporting terrorist
groups runs contrary to everything about that university
campus.
Mr. NEAL. Thank you.
Chairman SMITH. I now recognize Mr. Smith.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Certainly,
thank you to our witnesses here today, as well.
This committee's jurisdiction is built around the tax code,
obviously, and it is important we conduct oversight to ensure
entities receiving tax exemptions or credits through the code
are following applicable rules. That concept is not unique to
educational institutions. For example, I don't really agree
with much of the Democrats' stimulus bill from 2022, but they
understood what they were doing when they wrote domestic
content requirements into their electric vehicle tax credit.
We have historically limited who credit unions can serve,
and how much they can lend to businesses because they are
exempt from tax, while banks are not. Even popular individual
provisions like individual retirement accounts and 529s have
rules about what you can and can't do with the funds in
exchange for receiving tax deferral or exemption.
Colleges and universities shouldn't be treated any
differently. They receive their tax-exempt status on the basis
of providing quality education in a safe environment. When they
fail to do that, we should all be concerned.
I am chilled by what I hear not just on the news, but
comments here today.
Professor Davidai, you have spoken publicly about the
radical viewpoints taught by specific professors, I believe, at
Columbia. For example, it is my understanding that one
colleague of yours, known for anti-Israel positions, recently
published a controversial article which described the Hamas
attacks as ``awesome,'' and as a ``resistance offensive.'' I
think you have pointed to some of these.
But another Columbia professor published a social media
post stating, ``I am with Hamas, and Hezbollah, and Islamic
Jihad.''
I know that this is not limited to just Columbia. That is
certainly my observation. But it is bad enough when students
might intimidate other students and the administration would
take a dismissive posture. When faculty engages in rhetoric
such as this, I am extremely concerned. I find it chilling,
absolutely chilling that this situation is what it is.
Professor Davidai, from your perspective, how would you say
the spread of these viewpoints from faculty has impacted the
student population?
And if you could, elaborate further than what you have
already stated in terms of the actual impact on students.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Thank you so much for this question.
So first of all, we have to note that there has been a
systemic--sorry, systematic--purging of certain viewpoints from
Columbia University and other universities. It used to be the
case that students who were interested in engaging in critical
thinking could go and listen to the professor you mentioned,
Joseph Massad, hear his viewpoints, which I completely disagree
with, and then go and sit on a different class with a professor
with opposing viewpoints who actually believes that Jews do
have a right to exist, and the students will have some balanced
point of view.
The problem is that throughout two, three, or four decades,
there has been a purge of professors who disagree, who disagree
with people like Professor Massad, Hamid Dabashi, and the
sorts. And now students are just not educated. They are
indoctrinated. When you are only allowed to listen to one point
of view, then you end up either agreeing with that point of
view because you didn't get any opposing views, or you drop out
of the class.
There are--there have been experiences of students that
feel like they have to write papers that oppose their own
values just to get a passing grade. So I believe that is a huge
problem for education.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Right, thank you.
Ms. Dror, I want to talk briefly about the, you know,
501(c)(3) part of our tax code, and that exempt purpose. We
could talk probably a long time, in addition to the discussion
here, in terms of, you know, tax-exempt status and what does
that do for students. It certainly doesn't seem to lower the
tuition much, but especially when students would feel harassed
in the environment where these institutions have massive and
generous tax breaks that they take advantage of. What would you
say is the impact on students themselves?
Ms. DROR. Universities are using their federally-allocated
funds to fund hateful student groups like Students for Justice
in Palestine. And it is--or fellow organizations that
essentially organize and spew hatred. So universities are now
using Federal funds that they get through, if I am not
mistaken----
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Federal funds would be even
different than the tax-exempt status that is enjoyed by these
institutions. But it is resources, nonetheless.
Ms. DROR. They are using their very exorbitant amount of
power and wealth to fund anti-American students promoting
hatred and anti-Americanism.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Okay. Thank you.
I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Doggett.
Mr. DOGGETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So many of the chants and taunts since October 7 have
fueled antisemitism, and the incidents that you described today
are truly outrageous. I have joined one resolution after
another, one letter after another to condemn and respond,
including the important and very appropriate recommendations of
the Anti-Defamation League, such as the Never Again Education
Act and the Department of Education's Center to Combat
Antisemitism.
At the same time, I took this position not after October 7,
but throughout my life, and particularly on August 12, 2017,
condemning those White nationalists that marched through
Charlottesville with their torches, yelling, ``Jews will not
replace us. Unlike President Trump, I did not find good people
on both sides. Rather, I saw dangerous racists and anti-Semites
on one side. Yet Trump could not bring himself to treat neo-
Nazis and the KKK any differently than Vladimir Putin. Never a
genuine word of criticism.
Even today, our colleagues had to push back this very
hearing in order to meet with the former President, who very
recently said that Jews, like our former colleague Ted Deutch,
who don't vote for him, ``hate their religion and hate
Israel.'' I think we need a broad concept of what antisemitism
is, and that it applies there also.
I also reject the opposition and the attacks that have
occurred on and off campuses to the very concept of a
democratic Jewish state, which I support. There were no
Palestinian martyrs on October 7, only murderers and rapists.
Our hope, though, of saving the lives of innocent
Palestinian women and children is diminished by every protest
that can be discredited as antisemitic, and every action that
drives our neighbors away, instead of causing more of them to
recognize the true nature of the catastrophe that is ongoing
today that results from Netanyahu's indiscriminate bombing and
unwillingness to facilitate essential humanitarian aid to the
Gazan people. In confronting rising antisemitism, we need equal
concern about rising Islamophobia and hateful acts against
Muslims, blaming the innocent for what they did not cause.
I believe in policies and practices that protect all
individuals, Jewish and Muslim, from hate and discrimination.
This includes robust reporting mechanisms for antisemitic and
Islamophobic incidents, comprehensive anti-bias training, as
you have urged today, and a zero tolerance on hate speech and
discrimination.
Antisemitism should not be weaponized as a way to attack
those of us who disagree with the policies of Israel's ultra-
right government, and specifically with the self-serving
actions of Netanyahu and his partner, Ben-Gvir. Such
misapplication only demeans the term ``antisemitic.''
And today one of our Republican witnesses is here to take
the misuse of antisemitism a step further by arguing that, ``A
main contributor to the new left antisemitism is atmospheric:
the radical diversity, equity, and inclusion, DEI, ideology.''
Such claims not only misconstrue diversity, equity, and
inclusion, but also basically pit one minority group against
another.
DEI responds to decades of systematic exclusion of people
of color from higher education in states like mine in Texas. It
seeks to create a culture of respect and understanding for all.
Both communities of color and Jewish Americans are all too
familiar with the very real prejudice that they have endured.
Shared mistreatment has often united them to stand up together
against injustice.
With the University of Texas at Austin yielding to the
legislative pressure to shutter the Multicultural Engagement
Center, we lost a home away from home, as many students
described it. It is a center where, as Congressman Deutch has
suggested, there ought to be a place to educate about Jewish
history and antisemitism.
I don't say that every DEI program across the country has
been without fault, but we should be finding common ground
there.
And it is a mystery to me why the Republican leadership
here continues to refuse to permit a vote on Congressman Kathy
Manning's H.R. 7921, Countering Antisemitism Act to establish a
national coordinator to oversee an interagency task force to
counter antisemitism. It should have been approved long ago.
We live in a time here in America and in the Middle East
where neither side can appreciate the well-justified pain of
the other. Together we have got to seek to overcome the fear
and the pain to promote more understanding and capitalize on
the talents of all Americans.
I yield back.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska [presiding]. Thank you.
Mr. Kelly, you are recognized for five minutes.
Mr. KELLY. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you all for being
here today.
It is amazing that we think we can have a meeting of the
Ways and Means Committee to come together to try to figure out
what the heck is wrong with what is going on in the world
today. The seeds of hate are sown long before the freshman
year. They are sewn at home by mothers and fathers, grandmas
and grandpas, aunts and uncles, and families. When we don't
teach our children early on that hate is wrong at any level and
in any people at all, I am amazed that we think there is a
political answer to a human problem. We can pass all the laws
we can. That doesn't mean they can be enforced, or that the
people will even accept that that is a law that I have to
follow.
We are having a debate today, a political debate that goes
far beyond politics. This is absolutely incredible, that we
think that somehow these seeds of hate that are sown at a very
early age and then fanned as the child grows can be corrected
by a law. It goes far deeper than that. I think it is appalling
that we think we have to call a committee hearing to address
something that is so fundamental in the raising of our
children.
We have destroyed the nuclear family with different
government programs. We have encouraged people to not try to
get better, to try to get more understanding, to try to become
a better person. And we have tried to substitute a government-
funded existence that is the worst thing to do to any human
being.
Ted, it is good to see you again, and I got to tell you I
just lost a really good friend of mine not too long ago. We
used to drive to high school together, and he was Jewish, and
the things that he had to go through were absolutely appalling
to me.
We sit here today and think that a law can be passed to
outlaw hate. And we know the drivers of most of this stuff that
happens at our highest universities: it is funding. My gosh, we
can't lose that stream of funding, so let's try to accommodate
that. No, what we need to do is quit accommodating the type of
behavior that we are seeing taking place not just here in
America, but around the world.
It is absolutely appalling that human beings can look at
each other and hate each other for something that they believe
in. I wish there was a law--and there is a law from a much
higher source than men can do on their own.
I have no questions of you, other than to say thank you for
taking time out of your life to come here again to talk to
people who love to turn everything into a political answer, as
opposed to common decency. If it doesn't start at home, you
can't expect it to grow. And if it is not supported by mothers
and fathers, aunts and uncles, grandmas and grandpas and
neighbors, why do we wonder that we see these things happen,
and by people who are in the highest places of education, and
say, how can they be so filled with hate? And how can we sit
back and think that somehow we are going to pass a law that
changes that?
The law we need to pass, if you are a mom and dad, it is
your responsibility. It is your responsibility. There is no law
that can be enacted that can stop this from happening.
Recognizing it is one thing; accepting it is not an
alternative.
So thank you all for being here. I have no questions for
you because we have talked before. We have talked before, and
things have only gotten worse. And somehow, we think it is
somehow it is the fault of a previous administration, or
somebody who didn't do this, or didn't do that. And we say,
please, find a mirror and take the longest look you can at the
reflection and say, ``What have I done as an individual to make
sure that my children don't grow up hate-filled, but rather
thankful for the country they live in, and their opportunity to
actually make a change or a difference in the world, a positive
change?''
So thank you again so much for doing this. I am baffled by
our continuance to have meeting after meeting, hearing after
hearing to think who is responsible for all this hate-filled
part of our society? Find a mirror. Thank you.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Thank you. I now recognize Mr.
Thompson for five minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all
the witnesses for being here today.
You know, in the months since October 7, communities across
our country and in my district have had to grapple with
enhanced antisemitism. On campuses in my district Jewish
students have been harassed and threatened. There have been
bloody handprints left on buildings. There is chants and signs
of, ``From the river to the sea.'' Even Jewish high school
students in my district have hate messages sent to them by
fellow students. This is absolutely cruel, it is unacceptable,
and it has to stop.
I vehemently defend Americans' right to assemble, to free
speech, and to protest, and I always will. But when Jewish
students are being singled out, targeted, harassed, made to
feel unsafe, that is not peaceful protest. It is not peaceful
assembly. Reasonable people can and do disagree about Israel
and Palestine, but we should all agree that students should be
able to study and to learn, free of any harassment, let alone
religious bigotry. Along with all my colleagues on this dais, I
too believe antisemitism is appalling and has no place in our
society.
Congressman Deutch, good to see you here today. You
mentioned that there is things that universities need to do to
improve the situation on campuses, and you spoke to that in
regard--in response to Chairman Neal's questions. But could you
talk about the physical security measures that may be needed to
ensure a safe and peaceful place from which students can learn?
Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Thompson, and I don't want to
take away from your time, but I just want to acknowledge that
the question that Mr. Kelly asked about what can I do
individually is a question that I think, really, all of us need
to ask, and I appreciated that.
Mr. Thompson, there is, as we have seen this dramatic
increase in threats to Jewish students on campus, threats of
violence since 10/7, the university has a responsibility to
meet the potential security needs. It is true in religious and
cultural places on campus. It is true in gatherings on campus,
so that there is adequate security so that they don't have to
close, shut down events in the middle, send people home because
they are not equipped with adequate security. It is so that
they don't have to cancel an event that was meant to be a
public event, only to shuffle the participants to an
undisclosed location, and a significantly smaller number,
because that is all they are able to help secure.
And it means ensuring that the speakers who come through,
have the security that they need, so that you don't wind up
losing the opportunity to hear from Israeli voices, and hear
from Jewish voices who are told, ``Don't come to our campus
because it is just not safe for you.''
There have been now 150--Mr. Marcus can confirm this--more
than 150 schools that have open title 6 investigations. The
title 6 cases are important. I mentioned earlier universities
should have title 6 offices so that they are starting to focus
on these issues, including physical security, and a way to
address them directly.
Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you very much. I would like to yield
the remainder of my time to Mr. Schneider.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you very much.
And, Mr. Marcus, if I can turn to you a little bit, and it
is a broad question, but I will set it up for later. The
protests we are seeing on campus, the professors and scholars
coming out to join or even lead changing curriculums in their
campuses, is that something new or is this something that we
have seen on campuses for a long period of time?
Mr. MARCUS. So Mr. Schneider, we have seen protesters on
campus for a long----
Mr. SCHNEIDER. I am talking about the professors, the
academic scholars, for example, with the ASA and other
associations supporting anti-Israel positions and rhetoric.
Mr. MARCUS. We have seen protests, but there are protests
and there are protests. And we have seen faculty engaged in
protests, but not at this level. Now we have a much greater
politicization, a much greater polarization, a much greater
involvement in faculty.
And let's admit it, there is a difference between
protesting a war in which one could say that there are, you
know, issues of--it is very different when you look at a so-
called protest that began even before the Israeli Defense
Forces encroached into Gaza, a so-called protest that began as
soon as the Hamas atrocities became publicized. These are not
just protests, these are extremist support for terrorist
actions. The fact that faculty are supporting that in many
cases, this is unprecedented, and shouldn't be compared to
prior protest activity.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you, I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Schweikert is recognized.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.
Okay, we are going to try to go through a couple things
here. First off our scope is tax money, universities, those
things. But I am incredibly concerned that the almost evil-
crazy that I see coming in on my own personal phone--the fact
of the matter--and Congressman Deutch would be able to process
this--you open up your phones on Monday morning and start
having your staff go through your voicemails, and there is
hundreds and hundreds of actually ``Burn civil society down,''
just almost evil. And my fear is much of it is a bot. It is the
use of technology.
How much of the mind-bending from the people who used to
have the bumper sticker that would say, ``Coexist,'' to now it
is a bumper sticker of a Palestinian flag with a weapon
attached to it? What has snapped here?
And my fear, Mr. Chairman, as we do our little piece here
on universities, and how much of this is foreign influence
money and other things falling through the process, are we
capable, as Members of Congress, of having a societal
discussion of the financers and generation of hate that seemed
to be coming in from foreign entities, maybe even from some
fairly sick entities in my own country? And it is burning
down--the potential burning down of civil society across the
world.
Congressman Deutch, you won't remember, but years ago you
and I had sort of a side conversation on some of this and my
fear, the use of technology to push antisemitism, and that it
is a handful of people who have bought bots and natural
language, you know, chat. How much do you believe this evil is
being pumped into our society, and manipulating young people's
brains and even other people's brains is being financed from
outsiders?
Mr. DEUTCH. Well, we know a couple of things clearly. We
know that state actors are involved in this effort to help
divide the people of the United States from one another. We
have seen the same thing. This is the playbook. That is the
playbook that the Russians have used around the world and have
done the same thing here.
We know that that the Iranians and other state actors are
also involved. And I am going to--this is one where I defer to
the House and my former colleagues to continue to make sure
that that is a focus.
We also know, though, that when it comes to funding, the
questions that are being asked are important, and the effort--
the deterrent act that seeks to have--impose penalties for non-
compliance with disclosures, I think, is important. At the same
time, I think that I would just suggest--please.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. No, no, no, you--because you are going
exactly where I want--can you help young persons, older people,
people who, you know, they get their news from fringe, crazy
things here understand through that disclosure you are being
manipulated, you are being used. These people are trying to
exploit you.
Mr. DEUTCH. Right. I think it is important to remember
that, while there is a serious effort to do that that is coming
from the outside, what they are manipulating----
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Yes.
Mr. DEUTCH [continuing]. Is the algorithms of the social
media companies.
I think we should start by expecting that the social media
companies enforce their own rules about the kind of content on
their platforms that put Jewish students, in particular in
recent months, in harm's way.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, the former congressman sort
of went--I wish we as a body could have a more holistic
discussion, because today it is antisemitism. It is burning
down and moving back to a historic evil. And it will tear civil
society apart.
And look, I have a piece of legislation to try to provide
more flexibility for the Religious Institutions Security Act,
because how many of my schools actually now have to have armed
guards there, and things of that nature. I wish we would
actually look at a number of these ways we can protect each
other.
And then we have to have a conversation again. What the
hell happened when my--the wonderful people--my leftist
neighbor pulled off the ``Coexist'' bumper sticker and went the
other direction. What snapped? I am not smart enough to
understand it, but I am actually quite worried not only for my
Jewish community, but for my country.
I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you. Mr. LaHood is recognized for
questions.
Mr. LaHOOD. Thank you, Chairman Smith, for holding this
hearing today. I want to thank the witnesses for your valuable
testimony here today and your passion.
Welcome back, Congressman Deutch. Good to have you here.
Since the atrocious terrorist attacks committed by Hamas on
October 7, we have seen widespread antisemitic activity on our
college campuses, as has been alluded to today, one estimate
reporting a 321 percent increase from 2022. What is worse, we
have seen a complete lack of leadership by university leaders
and campus administrators at many institutions, leaving Jewish
students, faculty, alumni, and community members without any
actual protection or support.
As we continue to see this antisemitism rage on college
campuses, I think it is important to consider the U.S.
Department of Education's role here, as well. As many of you
know, Title VI of the Higher Education Act prohibits
discrimination based on national origin and shared ancestry,
among other things--and it is supposed to be enforced by the
Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights, also known as
OCR.
Unfortunately, OCR too frequently settles these cases with
schools through resolution agreements instead of making a final
determination about whether a Title VI violation actually
occurred. As a result, it appears that many schools avoid
scrutiny and accountability for their actions by implementing
short-term remedial corrective actions, as directed by the
Department of Education.
Mr. Marcus, I appreciate your public service. As we look at
this ability of the Department of Education and their Office of
Civil Rights to enforce Title VI violations, I am just curious.
As we look at the last eight months and what has gone on in
these college campuses, I am curious what you think, your
opinion on whether the Biden Administration has done a good job
in enforcing Title VI and handling these complaints of
antisemitism that we have seen across the country.
Mr. MARCUS. Thank you, Congressman LaHood.
I think that this Administration has done some things well
with respect to antisemitism, especially in outreach, public
messaging, and transparency. But the investigations have been
extremely slow, the policy formulations have been weak. There
have been too few in the way of resolutions, and there have
been dismissals that I think are hard to defend. So I would say
it has been a mixed bag.
And I would also say that you make a good point about the
problem that some cases that should lead to a final disposition
and perhaps punishments are resolved perhaps prematurely, but
in ways that the statute may require because, by statute, OCR
must seek a voluntary resolution, and in some cases that does
weaken their response.
Mr. LaHOOD. Can you give us any examples in the last eight
months where there has been a determination that has been done
that will send a deterrent message to this type of behavior by
universities?
Mr. MARCUS. No, sir, not in the last eight months with
respect to a university.
With respect to the Davidson School, which is K-12 in the
last month, perhaps. With respect to the last maybe 16 months,
the University of Vermont. So there have been a couple of cases
that have sent useful signals, but not enough, not recently
enough, and especially not recently with respect to higher
education.
Mr. LaHOOD. Well, I would agree with that. Can you tell me
if a proper civil judgment was, you know, put in place against
a university or a college through the Title VI process, tell me
what that would do in terms of sending a message from a
financial standpoint and a deterrent message of the
consequences for the lack of enforcement.
Mr. MARCUS. So monetary judgments can sometimes be
available under title 6 with a private lawsuit, but those are
expensive, not available to everyone, and time-consuming.
Under the OCR process, there are very few instances in
which money damages are available. If there were an ability to
get money damages, it would presumably provide a nice incentive
effect. I think that that would be a useful addition to the
process.
Mr. LaHOOD. Is it your recommendation that we ought to
think about statutory changes to make the enforcement mechanism
stronger and more robust?
Mr. MARCUS. Yes, sir. The process is--it is slow, it is
weak, and I think it would be useful to consider strengthening
it not just for Jewish students, but for all.
Mr. LaHOOD. Thank you.
I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Larson.
Mr. LARSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank
all the witnesses, especially Talia.
And for all you have been through, we appreciate your
testimony and your passion and commitment.
Also, Mr. Chairman, I want to commend--this is--not often
on the committee do we see unanimity in terms of the forthright
concern about antisemitism, and some of the compelling
testimony, and also some of the compelling questions from our
colleagues.
Along the lines of what a number of members have said, I
wanted to ask our former colleague, Mr. Deutch, especially
because you are so familiar with the process.
I would like to submit for the record a report from the
Department of Education that shows that the Department of
Education Office of Civil Rights has received a record number
of discrimination complaints while losing Department staff, and
so that kind of cuts to the question that Mr. Marcus was asked,
as well, et cetera, and also plays to your response with regard
to the administration. If your budget is cut, and you have
record number of complaints, and were not receiving the
resources, and the Department of Education isn't able to meet
these critical cases, what happens, especially when cases are
put forward and they are left open for months.
[See the Fiscal Year 2023 Annual Report:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Deutch, could you respond to that?
Mr. DEUTCH. Sure. First, just to follow up on Mr. Marcus's
point, I think--and your exchange with Mr. LaHood--I think it
is really important for the Department to be very clear about
what the potential repercussions are for universities, so that
everyone understands, so that everyone understands what the
result of these cases could be, where these could lead. The
fact that they are now--it is a step forward that they are now
disclosing the number of cases. I think it is really important
to be clear about what the penalties are.
And then, at the same time, the good news is there are so
many--good news/bad news--but because of the situation we are
in, there is a crisis, but they are stepping up to meet the
crisis and launching these investigations. The problem is there
aren't sufficient investigators. There aren't enough resources.
I agree with Mr. Marcus that it is slow. The workload for
each of the investigators almost guarantees that. They need
additional funding so that you can bulk up the staff at this
moment, when these--more investigators will mean a greater and
a faster response.
Mr. LARSON. Thank you. I agree with Mr. Marcus, as well,
with regard to that.
And I also agree that there is no one on this committee on
this issue that has as much passion as Mr. Schneider, and I
will yield to him my remaining time.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I am
going to pick up where I left off. I asked Mr. Marcus about
what he had seen in the past. Professor Davidai, you have kind
of been outspoken, and you have experienced it.
And first, let me apologize. I conflated Columbia with
Cornell. I know, Talia, you graduated from Cornell, as did you,
Professor Davidai. But you are at Columbia now.
And we saw this almost with a flip of a switch on October
7, the protests. Can you touch a little bit on what you saw on
October 7 and 8 in Columbia, as far as what the protests,
including from professors, looked like?
Mr. DAVIDAI. Yes, actually, I disagree with the premise.
This was not a switch that changed. This is something that has
been for decades. There has been a movie in 2004 called
``Columbia Unbecoming,'' about the antisemitic professors, many
who I have mentioned in my testimony. Columbia has known about
this and done nothing about that.
You asked about protests before. Well, in 2005--or starting
in 2005, Professor George Saliba used to cancel classes so his
students can attend anti-Israel protests. What we have seen is
not a switch, just an increase in the vehemence. And it
actually points to the question Mr. Schweikert asked of what
snapped. Nothing snapped. If you look around, the vast majority
of your colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, are not
here. They didn't see this as a top priority. So their
constituents and the students around the country, they see that
antisemitism, support for terrorism is not a priority for the
House. So why wouldn't they go and protest?
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you. I am going to challenge you,
though.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Yes.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. We have often times two, three hearings all
at the same time.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Exactly.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. There is a Budget hearing going on as we are
talking now.
Mr. DAVIDAI. That is why I said a priority. I didn't say
they don't want to be here. They have other priorities.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. It is not a matter of priority. We come, we
go. People will be here. You will see them coming throughout
this. This is a priority. That is why we have this hearing. It
is a priority. That is why we have had legislation come to the
floor, and we need to make sure it stays a priority. We elevate
it. And as Mr. Larson said, this is something that on both
sides of the aisle in this committee, Republicans and
Democrats, are focused on.
Mr. DAVIDAI. I respectfully disagree.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. I yield back.
Mr. DAVIDAI. I have to say I respect--priorities are--the
top priority is where you show up, and this is not the top
priority. It is a second, third, or fourth priority.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Davidai, I completely agree with you. I
believe members of this committee were asked to serve on this
committee, and they should be present, and it is all about
priorities. We are busy people, but this is the most important
committee in Congress, and that is why people should be in
their seats.
Dr. Wenstrup.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to give a
heartfelt thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.
You have been through a lot.
And before I begin, I would like to submit a statement for
the record on behalf of my good friend, Dr. Murphy, who could
not attend the hearing today due to a personal medical issue.
Dr. Murphy is a former member of the Board of Trustees at
Davidson College, so he has firsthand knowledge of the seismic
shift we are seeing on college campuses today.
[The statement of Dr. Murphy follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
And frankly, I find it disheartening and profoundly
disappointing that we are all here once again forced to reckon
with this virulent antisemitism that has only grown worse since
we last convened in November in the wake of the October 7
attacks. It is very disappointing.
You know, what I see happening on our college campuses, to
me, is anti-American, it is anti-Jewish, it is anti-freedom.
And to me, these are nothing more--some of these campuses have
become nothing more than treasonous cells and terrorist cells.
Ms. Dror, you have been terrorized, and so have many
others.
I don't know what people are supposed to do for a college
education for their kids today. You know, maybe we can go to
homeschooling for college. I don't know where we are supposed
to go.
We need to consider where we allow our tax dollars to go.
Our President wants to pay off student loans even for those
that hate America. And it is the very taxpayers whose money it
would take to do so. What are we doing?
You know, it is not just universities. It is throughout. It
is in sports. It is everywhere else. I had an NFL running back
one time get in my face that I haven't done enough to promote
DEI. I didn't see him promoting DEI for his offensive line. It
was merit-based, wasn't it?
And though many institutions, their intentions may be
good--and when we see this in professional sports, you know,
not all teams are playing along with the negativity. And what I
would much rather see in end zones today is maybe something as
simple as love your neighbor. That seems to me to cover it all,
and we would be much better off.
So I think about what can we do here in this body besides
greater awareness that only goes so far. Professor, you just
alluded to that. It is very difficult. But I will say this, and
I allow any one of you to answer the question. What would
happen if we cut off federal funds to any university that was
allowing these types of things to go on on their campuses?
Mr. DAVIDAI. So I would say that, even before you cut it
off, their knees will start shaking and change will happen.
We have to remember, Columbia University is the largest
private landlord in New York City, and it is a tax-exempt
largest private landlord. They own the land of Rockefeller
Center. They own most of Morningside Heights, and many of the
buildings in Harlem. You know, if only the thought of losing
that tax exemption would pass through their minds, you would
see no more antisemitism. You won't see any misdoing anything
on campus, because these universities--and I have spent a lot
of time in these universities--they are not elite universities,
they are expensive universities. All they care about is money
and PR. And if you start playing with that, things will change.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Thank you. Anyone else?
Ms. DROR. I couldn't agree more, and I would like to
actually take this moment to thank Mr. Smith for his
investigation. Every single positive action I have seen out of
Cornell in the past seven months has been the result of the
pressure of this committee. I have a lot to be grateful for,
but I do think that you will see tangible, tangible results
when you place pressure on these universities that think that
they are allergic to any form of punishment.
Mr. PIDLUZNY. May I add one thing? And thank you for the
question.
I think the premise behind the tax exemption is that these
are institutions that are organized and operated exclusively
for educational purposes. Universities don't look today what
they looked like 50 years ago. They have 4, 5, $6 billion
budgets. They manage wealth equivalent to a large hedge fund.
They sell a lavish college experience, luxury dorms, gourmet
food subsidized by taxpayers. They operate multi-million or
billion-dollar research labs. They hire teams of lobbyists.
Some have hundreds of millions in foreign revenue. They run DEI
programs that understand their purpose as being to reengineer
American society. That is a political purpose; that is not an
educative function.
Elite universities are simply no longer driven by truth-
seeking or education as their guiding ethos.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Anyone else?
Thank you, I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Dr. Ferguson.
Dr. FERGUSON. Thank you, Chairman Smith, and thanks to each
of you for being here. I want you to think about time in our
nation's history when we actually had universities that would
discriminate against African-Americans on admissions policies.
How horrible do we think that that was and is, and it should
never happen again.
And I take you back to the case of United States v. Bob
Jones University, where, because of their racially
discriminatory policies, their tax-exempt status was removed.
And in studying the case--and keep in mind, I am a dentist
playing lawyer up here, so you will have to excuse my very
simplistic method here, but it seems that we are in very
similar territory right now, where you have universities that
are clearly violating the civil rights of its students.
And the Honorable Mr. Marcus, could you weigh in on--do you
think that there are similarities in the violation of the
students' civil rights today that is like what happened with
Bob Jones University?
And do you think that that should be reason for the IRS to
revoke the tax-exempt status of these universities that
continue to violate the civil rights of their students?
Mr. MARCUS. Congressman Ferguson, you have raised an
important issue. I don't think we need to compare the
discrimination that Jewish students faced to those of African
Americans to realize that there is a problem, and a problem
that is not being taken seriously enough.
Universities are responding to OCR investigations. They are
responding to lawsuits. However, most universities are
virtually addicted to Federal funding and tax exemption. If any
university was seriously threatened with either one of them, it
would create a massive change within both that university and
also its peers around the country.
Right now we don't have that sort of incentive effect. We
don't have the sort of action that you described with respect
to Bob Jones University. But if we had that sort of
forcefulness, it would get a very different sort of reaction
than what we have been seeing.
Dr. FERGUSON. So what--and, you know, look, I am pragmatic,
and I am a political realist. And we could go through the
process of writing legislation and passing laws. I don't know
that--how many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
would move to advance this, particularly in the U.S. Senate,
and I have really no hope that the current Administration would
sign it into law, much less enforce it.
However, there is precedent to do this administratively
through--with the IRS, and it seems to me that a very similar
type of environment exists here. And I am just wondering when
student groups or different advocacy groups would actually look
at suing these universities to have their tax-exempt status
removed for violation of the Civil Rights Act.
In addition to that, not only should the IRS look at it
administratively following their guidelines from previous
cases, but I think they should even think about introducing not
only removing the tax-exempt status, but possibly a financial
penalty, as well. If these schools are going to receive federal
funds--and if they don't do that, there should be some sort of
clawback or even some sort of penalty.
Professor, could you speak to that?
Mr. DAVIDAI. Yes, I really appreciate your pragmatism. Like
you, I don't like big ideas that are not rooted in reality. So
I would say the most pragmatic thing is for Americans to
understand what they are funding, right?
Like, we talk about universities as this broad thing----
Dr. FERGUSON. But Professor, I think this committee and our
chairman have done a great job of really looking at that piece
of it. But in the end, there has got to be a mechanism or a
lever that can be pulled that has a profound effect on their
behavior. And it seems to me--and Doctor, if you could weigh in
on this very quickly--that removal of the tax-exempt status,
and that tool has been used in the past by the IRS--it seems
like that would be a very effective tool, and also a financial
penalty for the violation of student rights while they are
receiving Federal funds.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Right, so one thing----
Dr. FERGUSON. Professor, do you mind if I let Dr.----
Mr. DAVIDAI. Oh, because I would just say--sorry, but one
thing that I would say. Once the universities' budgets get
hurt, this will be affecting the professor's budget. And once
the professor's salaries and research budgets get hurt, they
will upkeep the norms, and push out the hateful professors from
amidst them.
Dr. FERGUSON. So very quickly, Mr. Chairman, do you mind if
we--response----
Chairman SMITH. Proceed quickly.
Mr. PIDLUZNY. So my opinion is that only strong financial
incentives will change behavior.
One of the things we have observed in the last eight months
is that universities that don't have tremendous amounts of
resources, they don't have this problem. And the reason they
don't have this problem is because they don't have money to
waste on highly ideological, divisive programs. They focus on
educating. And so, if we constrain the funding, universities
will have to make choices, and some of them will redirect their
resources to their educational mission.
Dr. FERGUSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your
indulgence.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Mr. Pascrell.
Mr. PASCRELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for putting
us together this morning on this very important topic. Each
witness was excellent, I thought. And I think, Mr. Chairman, it
is good to point out the fact that some of our brothers and
sisters have left. They probably have other assignments. But
don't forget, we were a half hour late. We were a half hour
late starting the committee to begin with. And I am not trying
to be a wise guy, but what is fair is fair here.
The children are listening. Don't think they are not
listening. So we can compare notes since October the 7th to
talk about how we, our families, have been put in jeopardy
perhaps. But we must protect also what I would call academia.
We are not going to solve this problem by threatening academia.
We haven't in the past on other issues.
I agree to some degree with my brother from Pennsylvania,
Mr. Kelly, that the law and your heart are two different
things. We know that. But we are a nation of laws. We made that
decision a long time ago. And balancing those losses is
difficult. It is complex. That is why we have a legislature.
That is why we have an executive. That is why we have a Supreme
Court. Regardless of how you like them or you don't like them,
that is why we have three branches of government to try to
check and balance. So you are not going to solve this problem
and threaten academia.
And free speech is very important and very critical. When
it interrupts the comfort of a student trying to learn at a
college, we have a right to stand and protest that, to get the
institution who allows it to happen to wake up. I think that is
critical.
I studied the anatomy of what happened in Charlottesville.
I studied it very carefully from the two days before it
happened until the time when--what was his name? We forgot his
name already. James Fields killed a counter-protester, Heather
Heyer. I studied it very carefully, of what started off the
neo-Nazis that ran the park two nights in a row, and what they
chanted. Study what they chanted and what it meant.
We got major problems here. And you cannot equivocate. You
cannot say there is good and bad in each of the groups and
everything like that that we heard.
Democrats and Republicans have not done the job as they
should. But the children are listening. And the first people
they listened to were their parents. Listen to what Mr. Kelly
said. The parents, us. A wink and a blink gets you by
sometimes, but it causes a tremendous amount of damage.
Tens of millions of Americans have been shocked and
disgusted by the antisemitic poison we have seen in college
campuses. The displays of many of these campuses are a
disgrace. Administrators, faculty at some of these schools have
fostered environments of intolerance, ignorance, and cruelty in
the name of free speech, in the name of free speech.
No, we are not going to solve this by law. But if we are
quiet, and we don't speak up our minds, and are not afraid to
stand even when the crowd may not be with us--it is easy to
talk to everybody who agrees with us--we are in bad shape,
worse shape than I thought.
So I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that this be an ongoing
situation until not only we cool the waters, but we see
progress on the campuses so that we define what free speech is
and what it is not. And when I am on a campus to learn, and I
don't feel comfortable even to go to class, that is horrific.
And I will not tolerate it as a legislator. So get rid of me,
then. Try.
Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I hope we have another one
soon.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you. Thank you. Mrs. Steel is
recognized.
Mrs. STEEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for hosting this
hearing, and thank you for all the witnesses coming in.
I am not here to lecture you, because you know more than I
do about antisemitism and, you know, what is going on with the
campus. But we must ensure that schools are fulfilling their
educational purpose as required to maintain tax-exempt status
under the law.
But Professor Davidai just said that, you know, just take
that tax-exempt status away. I don't think that is enough,
because we have to do more than that. So my bill, the DETERRENT
Act, would add transparency, accountability, and clarity to
colleges and universities, and hold them accountable for
foreign funds they receive. And I hope that Senate will pass it
immediately because we see the Qatari, pro-Hamas countries
that, you know, they are actually pouring money in, hundreds of
millions of dollars to these universities.
When we had a hearing at the Education Committee, I asked
those university presidents--they are the ones raising funds
for their universities, and I asked them, How much you
received, the money from Qatar? He decided not to answer.
Actually, they said they are going to come back to us. But you
know what? We didn't get any answers because they all resigned
from their positions.
So I really want to see how much we really pour money into
brainwashing our students. Just brainwashing. You know what? We
have to teach our kids how to think, instead of just
brainwashing and spreading this propaganda. So we really have
to change these campuses.
And another thing is, when we actually take tax money away,
it is not--as of now, actually, it is not even going to the
classes or professors. It goes to the administration. We have
our--these prominent universities. It has a much, much bigger
administration than actually this money going into the
classroom. So we have to really watch out that--how much is
really going to the classrooms and students that, you know, we
really have to change that.
So Mr. Marcus, when students are assaulted during campus
events--because I just saw that--I think you all did, too, the
video--UCLA is one of the prominent colleges. I didn't go
there, I went to USC, so it is--you know, I think USC is a much
better school than UCLA. But having said that, one of the
Jewish students at UCLA was kicked in the face. They took his
yarmulke off. And this anti-Israeli protester during a pro-
Palestinian encampment--this protester was chasing him with a
taser. It should not happen on the campus.
So do you think it is a good indicator that schools are
fulfilling their educational purpose, as required by law?
And what do we have to do?
I think I am asking Mr. Marcus about this.
Mr. MARCUS. Well, Congresswoman Steel, I think that it is
fair to say that, when students are assaulted in that way, they
are prevented from enjoying an equal opportunity to an
education, no question about it.
I would also say that on many campuses there is a
permissiveness towards masked students. And then the
universities say, well, what can we do about it? We can't
identify the perpetrator. Well, they don't have to permit the
masks in the first place, and they certainly can take action
after it happens, if not also before. Yes, indeed.
Mrs. STEEL. How about those--that UCLA had the mandatory
meeting that the lecturer led the students in a ``Free
Palestine'' chant. I don't know if you guys all read about it
or you guys all watched it or not.
But Mr. Marcus, based on what you have seen, can you speak
to the role that radical faculty like this play in the
antisemitism occurring across the college campuses?
Mr. MARCUS. Look, there are good faculty and not good
faculty. But too often we are seeing faculty members who are
promoting this in a lot of different ways. There has been
discussion today about faculty members who actually join in
bigoted protest activities. But even beyond that, there are
faculty members who encourage it through their teaching,
through the doctrines they adopt, through the ways in which
they use the bully pulpit, as it were, to spread hate towards
the Jewish people, towards Israeli-Americans and others.
We can look at all of the new policies we would like from
Administration. But as long as faculty are fomenting this hate,
we are really not going to solve the problem.
Mrs. STEEL. Dr. Pidluzny--if I pronounced it right; if I
didn't, I am sorry--I understand that you have written about
this previously, what are your thoughts on what schools could
do better to combat the rise of antisemitism on their campuses,
and the role that radical faculty are playing in it?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Thank you for the question, and I applaud the
DETERRENT Act. Thank you for all that work.
I think we know from empirical research that universities
with pro-BDS, anti-Zionist faculty see higher levels of
student-on-student harassment, and we know that those faculty
are funded by foreign entities.
So I would say the first thing that they should do is they
should audit their foreign gifts. That is one thing that OCR
should ask universities to do as it starts to reach some
settlement agreements: Audit your foreign gifts and disclose
their purpose to the Department of Education.
Another thing that I think they could do is audit their
academic programs. Is their intense, anti-Israel bias in public
affairs? If there is intense intellectual bias in public
affairs disciplines, bring viewpoint diversity to those
disciplines so that students hear two sides.
Mrs. STEEL. Thank you very much.
I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Smucker.
Mr. SMUCKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this
hearing.
Since this committee met in November and December of last
year, not only has antisemitism on college campuses grown
worse, it has also morphed into anti-American rhetoric, as
well. And several institutions that we have heard today have
placated the mob of violent protesters who have terrorized
Jewish students. And we all worry, I think, about what the
situation will look like when classes resume at the end of the
summer.
At an earlier hearing I had asked about the impact of
foreign money from adversarial nations, or nations that don't
have our own interests in mind, the impact of that money on
domestic higher education systems. For example, Qatar has
contributed $4.7 billion to U.S. academic institutions from
2001 to 2021. It is the same country that harbors leaders of
Hamas in Doha, finances Hamas, and blamed Israel for the
October 7 attacks.
The University of Pennsylvania in my state received $130
million in donations from China from 2018 to 2023, including
from individuals with ties to the CCP. And of course, that is
the same CCP which has falsely accused Israel of being an
oppressor nation, and took the side of South Africa in calling
Israel's response to the October 7 terror attacks a genocide.
Mr. Pidluzny--and I hope I got the name close to right--
most higher education institutions are tax-exempt organizations
under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. This was
discussed briefly. But when this section of the tax code was
created, do you believe it was intended to be leveraged by
foreign governments?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Absolutely not. You know, I said a moment
ago--I think you may have not been in the room--that the
universities' tax-exempt status is based on their being
organized and operated exclusively for educational purposes. I
think, if you go back 50 years, that probably is true of the
vast majority of universities. They take educating very
seriously.
Today, you know, I am in the habit of recommending that
young people don't go to an elite university, as when I was a
university professor, or that they don't go to an R1 research
university because the faculty are in their labs doing
research, they are mentoring their graduate students, and they
aren't interested in undergraduate education.
So today our university systems or multiversities, they are
not focused on education, right? They are focused on
disseminating an ideology, right? Administrative spending is
through the roof. Some universities have more administrators
than they have undergraduates.
Mr. SMUCKER. So you would agree that it certainly is not
within the spirit of the law for foreign governments to
directly or indirectly promote their agendas at colleges and
universities?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Of course not. You know, the----
Mr. SMUCKER. Do you think--and I am sorry, I just don't
have a lot of time--do you think these institutions that
receive foreign donations should be subject to taxes on those
donations?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. I think that is an idea worth exploring,
because the only way to change behavior will be financial
levers.
Mr. SMUCKER. Do you know if foreign universities, just by
comparison, do they accept donations or grants from American
citizens, institutions, or the federal government?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. That is not something I have studied.
Mr. SMUCKER. Yes, and I wonder, if they do, how do foreign
countries regulate or monitor those grants? Do you have any--do
you know at all?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. I am not aware, no.
Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Marcus, you have seen how the Education
Department has failed at properly enforcing Title VI. Do you
believe that foreign donations which fund certain faculty
fellowships or departmental chairs have influenced the
curriculum at these institutions?
Mr. MARCUS. Foreign governments and foreign entities are
pumping a large amount of money into U.S. universities, and it
is hard to imagine that it is having no influence, and
particularly no deleterious influence.
At the same time, I would have to say that we are doing a
weak job on our own, particularly when it comes to our
elementary and secondary schools, which are now themselves also
a source of antisemitism, which then creates worse problems in
higher education.
Mr. SMUCKER. Sure. What transparency do we have now, or
what could we do to ensure that there is transparency around
these foreign grants, which potentially shape the school
curriculum?
Mr. MARCUS. We do have rules that require disclosure of
foreign contributions to U.S. universities, but weak
enforcement systems and little in the way of penalties when
they fail to do so. As a result, there has been widespread
failure to report over the years.
Mr. SMUCKER. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Mr. Davis.
Mr. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing, and I don't think we can discuss the issues enough
that we are discussing now.
I want to thank all of the witnesses for the care and
attention that you have given to your responses and to your
positions.
As I listen to the discussion, I am reminded of something
that President John Kennedy said one time discussing peace. And
he said that peace is not only found in treaties, covenants,
and charters, but in the hearts of men. And I guess, if he was
alive, he probably would say the hearts of men and women. So I
think we look for many places for answers and solutions.
It is so good to see you, Ted. And I am very interested in
the work that you are doing, and I assume that the purpose of
our hearing is to try and reduce antisemitism, reduce the rise,
reduce discrimination, reduce hatred, reduce all of those
negative things that we are seeing exist on college campuses.
And I guess not only on college campuses, because they exist in
many other places, many other organizational entities, and all
of the places where people do business.
Representative Deutch, let me ask you. Because I think if
we take or if we allow ourselves to take a deeper dive into the
history of our nation, the history of our Constitution, the
history of how America got to be the America that it is, that
many people would have different levels of understanding and
different views.
So my first question to you is, do you think if we studied
history more in our elementary and high schools, or leading up
to college campuses, that by the time individuals get there
their views may be different than some of what is being
expressed?
Mr. DEUTCH. Representative Davis, thank you. It is good to
see you, as well.
The answer to that is absolutely yes. The challenge--and
Mr. Marcus just alluded to this--the challenge is that now, in
too many elementary and middle and high schools, we have seen--
just as we are seeing on college campuses, we are seeing an
attempt to erase the Jewish contribution in America, to
specifically exclude the Jewish community, to refuse to
acknowledge the existence of antisemitism.
And the problem--I want to make one point, Congressman
Davis, that has not been made, because it should be obvious.
The reason all of this--the reason that everything that
Professor Davidai has experienced is so relevant to everything
we are discussing, our own survey shows that over 80 percent of
American Jews, over 80 percent, say that caring about Israel is
important to what being Jewish means to them. That is the--with
that understanding, Congressman Davis, yes, we need people to
better understand the facts about the Jewish community, the
facts about Israel, the facts about the history of antisemitism
that did not start on October 8, that for millennia this is
what we have been battling, what that means, and why we have to
combat it.
Mr. DAVIS. You mentioned the need for mandatory
antisemitism training. Are there examples of----
Mr. DEUTCH. Yes, sure. We, AJC, has provided training for
both high schools and, importantly, universities around the
country who will, when they acknowledge the problem on their
campus, will come in and provide training to the president and
his or her senior staff, or to all of the faculty, or, best
case, to the entire university community to help them
understand what antisemitism is, what the Jewish community is,
to help break down the antisemitic conspiracy theories that so
many people aren't even aware that they are using, and to help
them understand why anti-Zionism that says that the only state
in the world that has no right to exist is the Jewish state has
the impact that it does on the Jewish community when you say
it, particularly when the way that you say it is to call for
death to Zionists.
Mr. DAVIS. So we need to do as much in the way of educating
as we do trying to change our rules and laws and all of those
other things, as well. And one is probably as good as the
other.
Mr. DEUTCH. We need to educate as--and even as all--as the
August members of this committee talk about potential changes
to the law, the opportunity right now to go to all of your
local universities, all of the universities in the country and
ask the presidents, ``It is now the middle of June, what are
you doing to prepare for what is likely to occur, and the
threats that will exist for Jewish students when they return in
the fall?'' Now is the time for them to prepare those plans,
and to share them with the community and with the country.
Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much.
And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Mr. Hern.
Mr. HERN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the witnesses
for being here.
Congressman, thanks for being here.
There are many Jewish families and organizations in my
district in Tulsa, Oklahoma who are integral to our community.
My district also has a large evangelical population that prays
for the peace of Jerusalem, and I am proud to be one of those.
We also have the Sherwin Miller Museum, which hosts a sobering
exhibit, educating, as you just mentioned, citizens on the
realities of the Holocaust.
Understanding and remembering history is important if we
wish to avoid repeating the horrors of the past, just as my
colleague from Illinois just mentioned. Every American should
be outraged by what we are seeing across the country. These
demonstrations are pro-terrorism and anti-American, and should
be universally condemned.
This isn't just about expression. It is a dangerous
endorsement of violence on American soil. It is alarming,
protesters scaling buildings, waving terrorist propaganda,
repeating slogans rooted in hatred, barring Jews from entering
buildings, holding janitors captive. This isn't activism; it is
extremism, borderline terrorism.
It is deeply troubling to see the lack of moral clarity in
university leaders who refuse to condemn antisemitic
demonstrations on campuses. It is a sad day in America when
parents at school board meetings are deemed terrorists, but
Hamas's brutal violence against women and children is defended,
even celebrated, on our campuses across America.
Unfortunately, this confusion and chaos at higher
institutions of higher ed is not an anomaly. For decades,
prestigious colleges have slowly soiled their reputations by
embracing Marxism, Confucius institutes, and moral relativism
at the expense of merit, virtue, and truth. Education is no
longer the mission. Whether intentionally or not, this is
stupidity. Universities have allowed radical ideologies, often
funded by the Chinese Communist Party, to indoctrinate our
students. Universities have strayed from their academic mission
in pursuit of DEI, teaching students to make judgments of
people based on race, gender, and sexual identity, instead of
teaching students to respect every person as an individual with
dignity and inherent worth.
All is not lost, though. In the face of blatant hatred and
antisemitism, millions of Americans of all races and religions
have shown support, love, and kindness to our Jewish friends
and neighbors. Support for Hamas is support for terrorism,
plain and simple. Organizations that funnel money to terrorists
or take money from known terrorist organizations should not
hold tax-exempt status.
As members of this Ways and Means Committee, we hold the
power of the purse and tax-exempt status. With that power comes
great responsibility to provide oversight on charities and
universities that potentially abuse their tax-exempt status.
American universities continue to receive billions of dollars
in the form of taxpayer subsidies, tax breaks, and federal
payments. Yet antisemitic incidences increase on our campus.
Higher ed should not continue to receive taxpayer money in the
form of federal payments, grants, or tax exemptions if they
continue to turn a blind eye to antisemitism on their campuses.
Dr. Pidluzny, I understand you have written extensively
about DEI efforts on college campuses, particularly about how
these efforts fundamentally alter the course of an
institution's academic mission. These are the same institutions
that receive billions of taxpayer dollars each year through the
tax-exempt status. Do you believe these institutions, who
either implement DEI policies or promote antisemitism, are
worthy of taxpayer dollars?
Should American taxpayers be forced to subsidize this
institutional hatred?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Not if they continue once they are warned.
So I think universities need to be on warning that this is
something this committee is looking at.
I would also like to say a little bit about how profoundly
DEI has reshaped these institutions. We are talking about an
investment of 25 to $35 million at large universities like
University of Texas System or University of Florida System or
Berkeley. That is a quarter billion dollars over a decade,
right? That allows an army of activists to incorporate DEI
screens into hiring processes, into tenure policies. They
create mandatory trainings that teach young people to make snap
judgments about each other based on race stereotypes, race
exclusionary graduations, bias response teams, forbidden word
lists, new curriculum, right? This has profoundly transformed
our institutions.
Mr. HERN. Thank you.
Mr. Marcus, can you tell us what role you have seen DEI
programs play in the rise of antisemitism on college campuses?
Mr. MARCUS. Congressman Hern, I have seen a mixed bag. In
candor, we have seen some students who say that the DEI offices
have been a help to them when they face antisemitism. We have
seen many who say that it is not helpful to them. And we have
seen some who will say that it is a problem for a few reasons,
first because DEI offices in so many cases fail to even
recognize that Jewish students exist, or that antisemitism is a
problem; second because they too often have this notion of
oppressors and oppressed with nothing in between, and that sort
of simplicity isn't helpful; and third because, once they make
that division, they too often say, well, Jews are not among the
oppressed, they are among the oppressors, and they fall back on
stereotypes that are harmful both to Jews and everyone else.
Mr. HERN. Thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Kustoff.
Mr. KUSTOFF. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the
witnesses for appearing today.
And Mr. Marcus, if I could with you, I want to follow up on
a line of questioning that Congressmen Smucker and Hern have
asked about. In fact, I just looked up it has been 250 days
since the October 7 attacks which--in some ways it seems like
longer, in some ways it seems like yesterday, I think, to
everybody.
This past weekend, with the hostage rescue--by the way,
they weren't released, as some news organizations said. They
were rescued, bravely. But we learned that a journalist who was
working for the Palestine Chronicle was holding Israeli
hostages in his home in Gaza. Three of the four that were
released was held by him.
And I do want to remind people that the Palestine Chronicle
is part of the People Media Project, which is a 500(c)(3) tax-
exempt organization based in the United States of America.
So I bring all that up--Congressman Schneider and I
cosponsored a bill, H.R. 6408. It is a bill to revoke the tax-
exempt status of any non-profit that provides--keywords,
material support--to a designated terrorist group. And I will
tell you that I am proud that this committee passed that bill
out of this committee by a vote of 41 to 0. You know the
partisan nature of Washington. That says something. I am also
very proud that the entire body, the entire House of
Representatives, passed that bill on April 15th of this year by
a vote of 382 to 11--again, a very strong vote.
My point is this, and I am coming to my question in just a
moment: I think if we want to disrupt the financing behind
terrorists and extremist antisemitism, we have got to know
where the money is coming from in the first place.
Now, in your testimony, certainly in your written
testimony, you talk about the DOJ investigating, you talk about
OCR investigating. So my question to you is, what tools do they
have to investigate, to show that, from a reporting standpoint
or compliance, that it is being done?
And then secondly, if I can, from your standpoint, has the
Biden Administration used the tools that they have got with DOJ
or OCR to investigate and go to the root of the funding?
Mr. MARCUS. So Congressman Kustoff, we have not seen the
full array of tools being used by any means. Some tools, yes,
but certainly not all.
During the prior Administration we saw investigations of
undisclosed foreign funding in violation of Federal law. More
of that would be useful. We are seeing some actions by OCR,
some by DoJ, but certainly not the sort of joint initiatives
that those two departments used in prior administrations,
certainly not the sort of show of combined force on college
campuses that would send a signal.
So I would say that there remain unused tools that are
available that should be handled, but aren't.
Mr. KUSTOFF. All right. Let me, if I can, ask a question a
different way, maybe a different way than Mr. Smucker and Mr.
Hern asked.
In terms of higher education, you are formerly an
administration official with the Department of Education. Do
you have any recommendations on how we can increase the
transparency of the foreign funding as it relates to higher
education?
Mr. MARCUS. Congressman Kustoff, if you were to increase
the penalties for non-compliance, if you were to increase the
enforcement over non-compliance, if you were to lower the
threshold for disclosure requirements, in any of those
instances I think you would have much greater transparency.
Mr. KUSTOFF. Thank you. I thank you, I thank all the
witnesses.
And Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Kildee.
Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you so much
to the witnesses for being here. Your testimony is very
helpful, and I think comes at a critical moment.
Congratulations to Ms. Dror. It is good to see you again.
Congratulations on your graduation.
It is particularly good to see my friend, our former
colleague, Congressman Ted Deutch, a fellow University of
Michigan alum.
I will note thanks for the great work you are doing.
Look, I think it is clear antisemitism has no place in our
communities, and absolutely has no place on college campuses or
universities all across the nation. We are seeing acts of
antisemitism on the rise. The Anti-Defamation League has
reported large upticks in these threats, verbal and written
harassment, and antisemitic acts.
And let's be crystal clear: we are not talking about the
right to protest, we are not talking about the right to
disagree, we are not even talking about acts of civil
disobedience as we know them to be important elements of public
disagreement in this country. What we are talking about is hate
speech that has a consequence, instills fear in people, leads
to acts of violence.
Just two weeks ago, as a matter--as an example, I mentioned
the University of Michigan. A good friend of mine, a regent, an
elected regent at the University of Michigan, Jordan Acker, who
happens to be Jewish, had his law office vandalized with
antisemitic graffiti. Acts like this are completely
unacceptable, and can't become normalized. That is why hearings
like this are important, to put it on the record, to make it
clear that the right to disagree cannot be conflated with hate
speech that has a consequence and degrades the quality of our
society.
So I am happy to see some action. I am happy that the Biden
Administration are taking actions to address much of this
ongoing engagement with Homeland Security, Department of
Justice, state and local law enforcement. That is important.
But speaking out on antisemitism is not and should never
become a political or partisan issue. And there are some who
will try to take this moment to weaponize it for political
purposes. Like most Americans, we can't tolerate that.
We all struggle to try to make sense of the acts that we
have seen take place, starting with a horrific attack by Hamas
on Israel on October 7, the fact that hostages continue to be
held, and for some, obviously--myself included--the thousands
and thousands of innocent lives that have been lost in the
course of this war. As an elected official, as a citizen, as a
father, as a human being, we have to mourn all of those losses.
But we can't allow that pain to translate to more pain and more
hate.
So let me ask Congressman Deutch if you might, from your
perspective--obviously, we see antisemitism as a serious
threat. Where in our society--I mean, we are talking a lot
about campuses, but where are we seeing the largest rise in
this sort of antisemitism, where in our society?
Mr. DEUTCH. Well, we are seeing--this gets exactly to the
comments you just made, Congressman Kildee. There is a refusal
to understand, to acknowledge the facts that we are dealing
with at this moment, the fact that there are 120 hostages still
remaining, the fact that, yes, we mourn the loss of every
civilian life as human beings, of course we do that. But there
is a refusal to acknowledge that the reason that those lives
are at risk is because Hamas will not return the hostages and
lay down its arms, that Israel is defending itself after the
worst terror attack--the worst attack against the Jewish
community since the Holocaust.
And where are you seeing this dramatic increase? You saw it
on the streets of New York. You saw it in the streets of
Washington just last weekend. You see it by those who are not
protesting the policies of an Israeli Government. They are
celebrating the atrocities of a terror organization. They show
up wearing Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad headbands. They
talk about killing Zionists more--1,000 more, 10,000 more
October sevens. That is where we are seeing this dangerous
spike. It is why universities--why this hearing is so
important. It is why universities need to be clear about what
they are going to do to hold people accountable when the
students come back in the fall. This is not a partisan issue,
and I appreciate your saying that.
And just finally, one other way to get at this, the other
piece of legislation that was referenced earlier, the Combating
Antisemitism Act, is a bipartisan bill, an equal number of
Democrats and Republicans on it, cosponsored by the--introduced
by the co-chairs of the Bipartisan Task Force to Combat
Antisemitism, and would specifically address all of this
antisemitism by having an ongoing effort in the White House and
at the Department of Education.
I really encourage, again, in the true spirit of
bipartisanship, which is on such full display here, which is so
gratifying for me in my new role running a fiercely non-
partisan organization, I would encourage members to take a look
at that, as well. And I thank you very much, my friend.
Mr. KILDEE. Thank you so much.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you very much.
Mr. KILDEE. Jason, you look different. [Laughter.]
VOICE. She looks good in the chair.
Ms. VAN DUYNE. The chair recognizes Representative Estes
for five minutes.
Mr. ESTES. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for
all the witnesses for being here today.
And Congressman Deutch, thank you. Good seeing you again,
coming back.
You know, the antisemitic activities that have occurred on
college campuses are absolutely appalling. Our institutions of
higher education should be beacons of hope in this country,
where students seek reason, truth, and an education to help
them with their life, and whether it is a career or personal
life.
Instead, we see disruption and unruly students, faculty,
administration, and, in some cases, outside provocateurs siding
with a terrorist organization and chanting, Death to Israel,
while forcing Jewish students to fear and hide, unable to fully
benefit from the college education they are paying for.
When you think about the atrocities committed by Hamas on
October 7, it is really unfathomable that anyone in the country
would stand up and carry the flag of terror and hate openly
onto a college campus and face no repercussions.
Unfortunately, this didn't happen overnight. While the
horrendous attacks on October 7 may have brought this to the
forefront, antisemitic activity has been a growing problem as
foreign bad actors have been funneling money onto our non-
profit colleges and universities to shape and influence these
institutions to promote a distorted worldview that is downright
anti-American.
Today we are seeing the effects of the millions of foreign
dollars from anti-Israel and anti-American countries and
organizations that have been pumped into our institutions, and
it is a horrible consequence that we are viewing now. Our tax
code and its treatment of college endowments shouldn't help
foster these kinds of antisemitic activities that have ravaged
college campuses across the country.
Mr. Pidluzny, you know, Ways and Means Republicans have
sought to hold America's so-called elite universities
accountable for permitting and promoting antisemitic behavior
on our campuses while allowing Jewish students to be
threatened, harassed, and assaulted. One mechanism in the
committee's jurisdiction is the endowment tax, first
established under the Trump tax cuts in 2017. Do you think that
that structure of the endowment tax should be revised in light
of the antisemitic activity on certain college campuses?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Absolutely. The universities need new
accountability structures because the existing structures have
proven inadequate.
If you just look at private universities with endowments
above $100,000 per student, the value of those endowments is
over a half-trillion dollars. If you look at the 12 largest
private endowments, 11 of those schools are the schools that we
have seen in the news. The only thing that will change the
behavior of our so-called elite universities is financial
penalties for tolerating this.
Mr. ESTES. You know, as you mentioned both in your prepared
remarks and in just the comments just now, as well, you know,
that, you know, the current endowment tax, as is set up,
affects private colleges and the institutions that have an
endowment value over $500,000. And it applies to roughly 35
schools in any given year. And as you mentioned, 11 of the 12
top universities were very prevalent in having disruptions and/
or protests and attacks. Do you think it is a coincidence that
there is a relationship between the amount of money that they
have and their tax status?
And what is the connection, and how can we address that?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. I think the connection between the money and
the grotesque antisemitism is that universities that are this
wealthy can waste a lot. And administrators, they are used to
giving into the radical DEI left. And as we have discussed in
this hearing, the DEI that we are concerned about is the DEI
that teaches students to make snap judgments based on identity
characteristics.
And the only way that they can account for the success of
Jews in America and the State of Israel is to turn the State of
Israel into the oppressor. And that makes, of course, the--
Hamas the virtuous victim, right? So I do think there is a
relationship, right? The wealth allows for these institutions
to waste money building up these DEI apparatuses.
Mr. ESTES. Yes. Well, you know, thank you. It is a critical
conversation that we need to continue having, and to kind of
seek out the root of, you might call it a plague or a disease
that is affecting so many of our college campuses, and make
sure that we maintain their status as good institutions for
higher learning for the students that go there and the money
that is spent by the students, by their parents, by taxpayers,
in terms of supporting them. So I appreciate your time for this
hearing.
And with that I will yield back, Madam Chairman.
Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes
Representative Tenney for five minutes.
Ms. TENNEY. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to this
really all-star panel and all that so many of you have done on
this really horrific issue.
I just--there are so many places to go, and I am not sure
where to start, but I wanted to just say that in nearby Cornell
University--my dad is a graduate of Cornell Law School back in
the 1950s. It was certainly not like it is today. He went on to
serve as a trial lawyer and a judge, one of the longest serving
Supreme Court justices in New York. He would be absolutely
horrified at what is happening at Cornell University.
And I want to--I just--I keep hearing--I see these
protesters, as we all do as Members of Congress--and thank you
also to former Congressman Deutch for being here and being a
leader on this issue, as well.
You know, we are confronted with people at our doors and,
you know, we need to get the truth out. And I think the truth
is what, really, these universities are about. Almost every one
of these colleges has Veritas somewhere in their motto,
including my own university, Colgate University in upstate New
York.
But my concern is how do we get this truth out? And I think
I would like--first I would like to ask Ms. Dror--and
congratulations, and thank you for being in the breach during
this really difficult time on campuses. Tell us a little bit
about what happened to you as a college student on a campus
where we had a professor just days after this horrific attack--
Professor Rickford actually described the acts of Hamas as
exhilarating and inspiring to Cornell students. And I watched
the GoPro video that we were all allowed to see, as Members of
Congress, that were on Hamas terrorists' heads and their
videos, and I--it was about a 45-minute montage. I could get
through about 20 minutes.
I almost--it is--I don't like bad movies or anything, but
this was the worst thing I think I have ever seen in my entire
life. It was horrible. And we have protesters and people coming
to our office telling us that this is not true. And I want to
just get your view, as a college student, and what you
witnessed on the college campus.
I immediately called right after October 7 for the
dismissal of Mr. Rickford. I did get a response from the
president, President Pollack at the time. They did put him on
leave, but I am sure he is still making money on paid leave. I
know it is not his full salary.
But when I get done with you I want to ask Mr. Pidluzny
about your discussion about the endowments, and the money, and
the exemptions that these college campuses--so if you could
tell briefly, just your experience and what is being done at
Cornell to try to bring us back to the truth, and to try to
keep, you know, the honesty in our college campuses.
Ms. DROR. Thank you for bringing that up. Actually,
Professor Rickford will be teaching again next semester, after
his paid leave is over.
But I think you alluded to something very important, and if
you will indulge me I do want to tell a quick story. The
foreign funding entering our universities are incredibly
concerning. Cornell gets 1.8 billion--capital B, billion--
dollars from Qatar, an adversary of the United States. In
December I was able to have a meeting with Cornell's CFO in
which I asked him, Cornell gets $1.8 billion from Qatar. There
must be strings attached, because there is no such thing as a
free lunch. So what is the string attached to your money? He
didn't give me a really direct answer.
But then I asked him, Mr. Cowen, what should I be telling
my community right now? The Jewish community on campus is
hurting. It was a month after we had received the blatant death
threats. I said, ``What should I tell my community?''
He said, ``You should tell your community that that girl
that testified in Congress, well, she is only 1 person, and we
have 17,000 students.'' I wonder if he knew who he was talking
to, because the girl he was referring to was me. And I wonder
if he knew that seven months later I would say his name into
the microphone, and show that that first question that Chairman
Smith asked in his most recent letter to administrators of
whether or not they believe antisemitism is actually present on
their campus, they might say yes, but the answer is no, because
in that moment he invalidated my suffering as a Jewish student
and the suffering of 22 percent of his student population.
There might be 17,000 students, but 22 percent of them are
Jewish, and many of them are Zionists.
And so the administration does not understand the issue
that is plaguing their university. It is systemic moral rot,
and they cannot understand that.
Ms. TENNEY. Well, thank you for that. And I think that
Professor Rickford should be removed from teaching altogether.
I mean, this is part of the problem.
And then to Mr. Pidluzny, we only have a few seconds left.
I agree with you. I think tax-exempt status, federal money
flowing in, the endowments getting taxed at such low rates,
money--you know, as they say in--money talks and BS walks. I
think this is really the only way to go with these. And you can
confirm that in the last few seconds we have, if the chairwoman
would indulge us.
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Absolutely. I think we need to look for new
accountability structures, as many of them as we can. And so,
looking at the endowment tax is one of those, tax-exempt status
is one of those.
But other ideas would be to start asking the question, does
a university with a $54 billion endowment, does it really need
to be eligible for title 4 funding? Or can it fund its own
students?
Similarly, we need to look at moving some of that title 4
funding off of traditional 2 and 4-year campuses so that
students who want to spend 15 weeks studying can also access
their Pell Grant. We need to change the financial incentive for
these corrupt institutions.
Ms. TENNEY. I agree 100 percent. These institutions with
these endowments have become about wealth, power, influence,
and politics. We know that, and that is--I thank you so much to
all of you. I am sorry I couldn't ask every one of you a
question, but thank you so much for being here.
And thank you, Ms. Dror, especially, for what you have
suffered at Cornell. Let's hope we remedy the situation with
Professor Rickford.
Thank you.
Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you very much. I would remind members
to try to keep their comments to five minutes or less.
The chair now recognizes Representative Sanchez for five
minutes.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Thank you. I want to thank the chairman and
the ranking member for providing this committee with another
serious opportunity to acknowledge and confront the reality of
rising hate in our nation.
And I also want to specifically thank our witnesses for
being here today and sharing your perspectives, particularly
Ms. Dror, for being for sharing your personal experiences.
It troubles me that across the country we are seeing a rise
in reported hate crimes. Antisemitism is just one of the ways
that we see groups that are targeted, but there are many other
forms of hatred, as well, from anti-Asian sentiment, to
Islamophobia, to anti-immigrant rhetoric. We are seeing this
rise in very dangerous, in my opinion, speech that I think
leads to violence. So I want to be very clear that we cannot
allow hate to grow anywhere, but especially here in the United
States, and especially at our nation's college campuses and
universities.
Universities have an obligation under the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 to provide all students a school environment that is
free of discrimination. But incidences of antisemitism, as we
heard today, across college campuses are still rising.
Universities should be places of knowledge, tolerance, and
mutual respect, and there is simply no place for hate on
college campuses across the country. We are a multi-cultural
society, and we should be encouraging acceptance and tolerance
for every group that is a part of the United--the fabric of the
United States.
We certainly have to prioritize student safety.
Universities need to provide a supportive learning environment
for all students. We know that more diverse and inclusive
campuses and workplaces foster safer environments for learning
and growth.
To those that are here today and who have experienced
antisemitism, you need to know that this committee stands with
you, as does the Biden Administration, which has focused on
combating antisemitism in school since releasing a related
national strategy last May. The DoJ and the Department of
Homeland Security have worked to strengthen coordination with
local and campus law enforcement to respond to increasing
incidences of hate-driven intimidation and also violence.
President Biden's Department of Education has also made very
clear that antisemitism, xenophobia, and racism are all
prohibited under title 6 of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
So I want to thank the Administration for standing so
strongly against hate in our schools and across college
campuses, because no student should have a fear of attending
classes or other on-campus obligations and opportunities.
I want to begin by asking the panel about hate speech. I
would like to know if any of you think that hate speech is sort
of the precursor to violence, or can lead to violence. Does
anybody disagree with that statement?
Mr. DAVIDAI. I completely agree.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Hate speech, if repeated often enough or
increasing in intensity, can lead to violence. Does anybody
disagree with that?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. I think the antidote to the hate speech is
more speech, other perspectives calling it out for what it is.
Ms. SANCHEZ. But the question is, does anybody here believe
that hate speech, if repeated often enough and increasing in
intensity, does not lead to violence?
Okay. Just want to make sure that we have unanimity because
we see rising hate speech in college campuses. And certain
groups at certain times in this country have been targets of
hate speech. And while it is easy to rush to the defense of
your community when your community is under attack, when you
hear hate speech that targets any group, we all have an
obligation, I think, to stand up and, as you said, Doctor, to
combat hate speech, to call it out for what it is, and to
correct the record.
So it is particularly disappointing when we see leaders,
whether they be academics or public servants, using hate speech
like the blood of our country is being poisoned by a particular
group, or like one particular group of people in this country,
they all have AIDS. That is hate speech. And if you repeat the
lie often enough, and increase in intensity, you are creating
the perfect tinder for the catalyst of violence.
So again, I just want you to know the committee stands
against antisemitism. We live in a multi-cultural society, and
we have to all defend each other when that happens. I am sorry
for your experiences, and I am here to work with my colleagues
to try to help combat that to the degree that we can, and we
will look for solutions, given the recommendations that you
have given us today. Thank you so much for being here.
And I yield back.
Ms. VAN DUYNE. The chair now recognizes Representative
Miller for five minutes.
Mrs. MILLER. Thank you, Chairman Van Duyne and Ranking
Member Schneider, and thank you all for being here today.
I am horrified by these acts of antisemitism, and I can't
really comprehend it. I grew up in the city of Columbus, Ohio,
within the city of Bexley, in a very large Jewish population. I
went to bar mitzvahs, bat mitzvahs growing up. There was a girl
in my class whose mother had a tattoo on the inside of her arm.
I cannot comprehend what is happening today. It just--it is
mind-blowing.
Ms. Dror, you know it is not easy to be here. You have
already done this once, you are doing it again. It can be
rather intimidating, but you seem like a very strong young
woman, and I am proud of you, and I commend you for the bravery
of standing up for yourself. And, of course, congratulations on
your graduation. And I am sorry that you really didn't have the
experience of enjoying your senior year, and hanging out, and
looking forward to graduation.
Did you have any help from the university planning ahead of
where you were going to go with your life in your senior year?
Did you have any of that kind of support?
Ms. DROR. Thank you, Mrs. Miller. It is great to see you
again, and thank you for your warm wishes. I will say I just
graduated, and I have had a pretty busy year trying to deal
with the hatred on my campus.
I have sent multiple emails to my university calling out
the hate, asking for help, asking them to do something, and I
have been met with generic email responses saying, ``Please see
the Office of Help and Care and Love and Hugs,'' and that
absolutely will not do it for me.
I have also turned to career services for help, and I
remember particularly in one meeting I was working on my resume
with a staff member when she told me, ``By the way, I just want
you to know, people might not hire you because of your
political involvement.'' My political involvement is standing
against Jews feeling afraid to walk on their campus. If people
aren't hiring me, we have a much, much, much bigger problem.
That is bigotry.
Mrs. MILLER. Yes. Thank you for that answer, and it could
be a lot longer than that, honestly.
Mr. Marcus, in spite of the instances of physical violence
against Jewish students, universities pretty much have still
held to inaction, and they are hiding behind free speech as the
reasoning for their silence. Violence is not free speech.
Violence is not free speech. And many colleges and universities
have adopted a policy of what is now called institutional
neutrality, which means that the institution won't take a
public position on social or political issues unless it
threatens the very mission of that school and its values.
So I don't know what to say. Since its creation, it has
been adopted by a number of schools across the country. Tell
me, what do you think of this policy of institutional
neutrality?
Mr. MARCUS. Congresswoman Miller, when the principle of
institutional neutrality first became popular, I thought it was
a fine idea because too many institutions are taking the wrong
sides of issues, and impairing the environment on their campus
for by doing so.
On the other hand, I noticed that there are many
institutions that are now adopting that principle only when
they have been asked to condemn terrorist attacks against the
Jewish people. Then, all of a sudden, they say, oh, well, maybe
we don't want to have to take a stand, and maybe if we adopt
this principle we will have some sort of cover, some sort of
excuse for why we don't do it. And I would say that, in those
instances, it is not really about neutrality, it is about
cowardice, and should be called out as such.
Mrs. MILLER. You know, I grew up in the 1960s, and I
experienced protests and the rest. Violence is against the law.
I thank you, and I yield back my time.
Chairman SMITH [presiding]. Mr. Fitzpatrick.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Thank you, Chairman Smith, for holding
this hearing.
It is deeply troubling that we are once again having a
hearing to discuss the rise in antisemitism across our nation's
college campuses. And since our hearing in November, we have
seen repeated acts of violence, the development of illegal
encampments, and a continued lack of accountability being
upheld by so many ``elite institutions.''
The rhetoric and actions of students, largely in support of
Hamas and in opposition to the ideals of democracy and freedom,
have drawn the admiring attention and support of America's
enemies. This includes Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of
Iran, the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. Iran has
long funded terror groups across the Middle East, including
Hamas and including Hezbollah. And on May 29, Khamenei tweeted,
``Dear university students in the United States of America, you
are standing on the right side of history.'' This example from
the world's leader of state-sponsored terrorism underscores the
threat we face not only from our enemies seeking to take
advantage, but even from within our own nation.
I want to start with Professor Davidai.
Can you speak to the shift you have seen within our
universities to having so many outspoken students be
comfortable with their alignment to an autocratic leader who is
actively desiring the downfall of these very institutions that
they are attending, that they are protesting at, and also
wishing physical harm to Americans?
Mr. DAVIDAI. Thank you for this question. I am really happy
to talk about this.
We are focused here on antisemitism and support for
terrorism. But at the heart of it you can see that this is
about anti-Americanism. Just a few examples. Students for
Justice in Palestine, the national organization, if you go on
to their website, it does not acknowledge the United States. It
says that they have 200--over 200 chapters across Turtle
Island. And then in parentheses it says ``occupied North
America, occupied United States and Canada.''
We had a professor, Hamid Dabashi, described Israel--and I
quote--as an ``outpost of American barbarism.'' This is a
professor at Columbia.
We had students celebrating the Houthis, right, the
terrorist organization that executes gay men just for being
gay, and who this morning shot down a merchant ship, a
commercial merchant ship.
So it really is an anti-American sentiment that is, like
people--smarter people have said before me, it always starts
with the Jews, it never ends with the Jews. And I think the
best way to see that is where do you see American flags? When
the pro-Israeli groups rally, you see Israeli flags and
American flags. When you see an American flag in these pro-
Hamas protests, it is only when it is being burned.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Thank you, sir. I want to quickly move now
to discuss school accountability.
It has been very troubling to see the reports of faculty
groups forming in the mold of Students for Justice in
Palestine. And in some instances, these Faculty for Justice in
Palestine groups are taking part in antisemitic efforts of
their student counterparts. For example, at the University of
Pennsylvania, my own backyard in Philadelphia, a chapter of SJP
blocked the main entrance to an administrative building during
a die-in protest, which was a violation of campus policy at
that time.
I want to ask both Mr. Marcus and Ms. Dror, based on your
experiences in this space, and familiarity with these campus
groups, what actions do you believe school administrators
should be taking to address specifically the faculty issue?
And Ms. Dror, in your experiences, have you seen instances
where Cornell is not actively enforcing their stated policies?
Ms. DROR. Absolutely. I can think of at least three
different instances in which faculty canceled classes. So
students paying for their tuition were denied the right to
their education in the name of Palestinian liberation and
supporting the encampment.
The faculty also got together and published an article in
Al Jazeera, Qatari-state-funded media. Our faculty--I think
today, actually--published a large letter with about 250
signees that endorsed terrorism, and endorsed all the protests
on our campus.
I think all faculty need to be terminated if they are
promoting anti-American beliefs. Russell Rickford, the faculty
member mentioned earlier, was hired after having written that
he blames Israel for committing 9/11. So there need to be some
serious, serious, serious reforms in the hiring processes of
these faculties, as well.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Thank you. My time has expired. So Mr.
Marcus, if you could submit your answer for the record, that
would be great.
Mr. MARCUS. Sure.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Mr. Schneider.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you, Chairman Smith, and I want to
thank the chairman and the ranking member for having this
hearing today, and our witnesses for your--sharing your
insights, your patience. I know it has been a long day, but
this is a critically important issue, as we have talked about
throughout the day.
Since October 7, a day--the worst day for the Jewish people
since the Holocaust, a day when Hamas sent thousands of
fighters across the border, terrorists across the border,
barbarically murdered, tortured, raped, burned dead bodies,
more than 1,200 killed, 250 taken hostage. Since that horrific
day we have seen a spike of antisemitism around the world in
the United States. But in particular, we are talking today
about what we have seen on campuses.
We have mentioned the spike. We have mentioned the fact--I
think Mr. Deutch mentioned that 80 percent of Jewish students
on campus have a sense of identity, of connection, of personal
closeness to the Jewish state. Not surprisingly, I think the
other statistic besides that is that approximately 80 percent
of Jewish students report fear or reluctance or decision not to
wear or display outward signs of their Judaism, whether it is
wearing a kippah or a Star of David.
What I would like to do, with the chairman's permission, is
introduce into the record a document, the American Jewish
Committee State of Antisemitism in America, 2023 Insights and
Analysis.
Chairman SMITH. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you.
Now, we talked earlier in the opening remarks. The sense
was part of the reason for this rise in antisemitism was weak
university leadership, the failure of universities to enforce
their policies of university leaders, to make clear--morally
clear statements. We have talked about the radical faculty and
other things. And throughout this we have also touched--and I
will add my items to the list.
But following the money, it is not just the money that is
funding universities, it is the money that is funding these
groups like Students for Justice in Palestine. Earlier, when I
was focusing on faculty, students and--Ms. Dror, you made it
through in four years, correct?
Ms. DROR. Three.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Three? Even better.
Ms. DROR. Yes.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. But over the course of that, freshman
students come in, they have to learn their way around, they
pick their classes, they get involved with various
organizations. Sophomore year, they start thinking about major,
junior major, and graduate, and go on to pursue their careers.
But there is an imbalance, as groups like SJP have people
who are in their 13th year of their 4-year Ph.D. program not
having completed a single class, but they are there with a
purpose and with funding behind it. I think we need to look
into that.
But I also want to be careful that we don't paint with too
broad of a brush. Dr. Pidluzny, you mentioned there are, I
think, 70 schools where we had these protests, roughly 3,000
people who have been arrested, but there are 4,000 colleges and
universities across this country. Not every university has
gotten it wrong. Not every university has been affected by what
we have seen on some of the campuses in the news.
We have to be careful that we don't delegitimize
differences of opinion, which is what we should see on our
universities, the ability to have that debate with each other.
With the focus on hate and violence, hate begets violence.
Violence makes our students feel unsafe and, ultimately, there
will be consequences.
Mr. Deutch, I want to turn to you with the minute that is
left. But you have been here in Congress. You are at American
Jewish Committee, seeing the challenges being faced across the
country. Can you highlight the most important things we should
be doing, besides talking about it and putting a spotlight on
the hate and violence we are seeing on campus?
What actions should we be taking that will have a real
difference as we head to the new academic year?
Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you. Look, I think the conversation about
tax-exempt status is important. I think the conversation about
foreign funding is important.
I would add to that, by the way. Why not have every student
group have to certify that they don't accept foreign funding,
as well?
There are lots of things that are part of this bigger issue
that we have to deal with. But right now, we--there is a train
that is barreling down the tracks. Literally, you saw it in New
York in a subway car. When people are allowed to get on a
subway car and say, ``Where are the Zionists? Are the Zionists
here? No Zionists here, this is your chance to get out,'' that
should send a chill down everyone's spine.
What Congress can do most--and here is what I have learned
since I left, here is my message to my former colleagues, and I
say this with enormous respect, and not to just make you feel
even better about the job you have--you have enormous power,
individually, every one of you. And what can you do? You, every
one of you--yes, the committee should act.
And Mr. Chairman, I am grateful to you and to the Speaker
for this whole-of-the-House approach. But every one of you can
play a role in your community, listening to your Jewish
students, listening to the Jewish community. If you don't have
a large Jewish community, you can speak out in support of the
American values that are at risk when we see what is happening
around the country continue to take place. That is what you can
do: expect the universities to take action now in advance of
this coming academic year to help protect Jewish students,
protect their environment that they operate in, our university
system overall, and ultimately, our democracy.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for one more
second.
The video from that train car was horrific, as they said,
any Zionist or any Zionist here--any Jewish person in that car
would have been afraid to stand up, but----
Mr. DAVIDAI. Not me.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Let me finish.
Mr. DAVIDAI. I would have stood up.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Let me finish, please. But no one else stood
up, either. It was utter silence, and those people were able to
say what they say. We have to speak out, and that is why this
hearing is important. We need to stand up. We need to speak out
and say, ``I say proudly as a Jew, but I say as an American
hate has no place in our country. We will stand up and make
sure it is defeated.''
I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Mrs. Fischbach.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I absolutely
agree. We have to be the ones that speak out.
It is tragic that we have to have this hearing. It is
absolutely tragic. It is 2024, and this should not be
happening. And it is appalling. And so you can see, as I was
listening to Mr. Schneider, I am getting more and more upset.
But I did want to kind of refocus. I know that Mr.
Fitzpatrick talked a little bit about FJP, and SJP has been
mentioned a couple of times, and so I wanted to ask Mr. Marcus.
I mean, you are obviously familiar with the group. Would
you mind telling us a little bit more about the group, and
maybe the role that it has been playing in this explosion of
antisemitism on campuses?
Mr. MARCUS. Congresswoman Fischbach, yes. There is no one
single group that is responsible for this entire problem. There
are many groups involved, and then there are many wrongdoers
who are not part of groups. But SJP is involved far more than
any other single individual on many, many campuses, not just in
protest, but in various forms of hate, as well.
On some campuses their violation of rules or undermining of
values has led to their temporary or permanent suspension or
expulsion. But they are still active on a large number of
universities. They are also active as law students for Justice
in Palestine. And now they are also faculty for Justice in
Palestine, as well.
These groups, in addition to having been found responsible
for violations of university rules and for their involvement in
issues that may create a hostile environment for Jewish
students, the toolbook for the National SJP says, among other
things, and I will quote, ``We, as Palestinian students in
exile, are part of this movement,'' meaning the resistance
movement, ``not merely in solidarity with this movement. We
must act as part of this movement.''
Now, the resistance movement is often understood to include
Hamas, known also as the Islamic Resistance Movement. So when
an organization of students who says that they are not merely
in solidarity, but that they are part of this movement, it
raises the question of how they, as an organization, are
relating to a U.S. State Department-designated terrorist
organization, and doing it actively on campuses around the
United States.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Thank you very much.
And Professor, maybe you want to add--and Ms. Dror, I am
going to ask you, too--if the response and the evidence we have
seen, how did the universities respond, did they take
sufficient or proper response to those organizations?
Mr. DAVIDAI. I can speak about a lot of universities, but
the best one that I can is my own, Columbia. Nothing. They have
written beautiful emails. It took the president of the
university six months minus two days to acknowledge that Hamas
exists.
So I have been asking, I have been pleading for them to
condemn Hamas. They wouldn't even use the word ``Hamas'' in any
official email until April 5, and that was because she was
subpoenaed to testify in front of Congress. So if it takes the
president of a ``elite''--not elite, but expensive--university
to even acknowledge that Hamas is responsible for this, then I
am not surprised, and you shouldn't be surprised that she and
her administration have done absolutely nothing.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Thank you.
Ms. DROR. I think something worth noting is the double
standard. All other groups are subject to policy enforcement,
and Students for Justice in Palestine and hate groups on my
campus are not. Fraternity brothers most recently received firm
disciplinary action for drinking beer in a backyard with a
permit. The Students for Justice in Palestine group had an
unauthorized encampment, ruined our entire quad, the entire
lawn needed to be redone, and did not receive any actual
enforcement on that. In fact, they received complete immunity,
and a thank you letter from our university.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Well, and I just want to say thank you all
for being here, and thank you for standing up, because you are
doing something courageous by being here, too. And I appreciate
it. And I, for one, I will say I will stand with you because it
is appalling that we are dealing with this in 2024. And I thank
you for being here.
And with that I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you very much.
I want to submit to the record, actually, an article that
was just brought to my attention at Columbia University. The
title is, ``Columbia Administrators Fire Off Hostile and
Dismissive Text Messages, Vomit Emojis During Alumni Reunion
Panel on Jewish Life.'' The administrators that are listed in
this include the dean of Columbia College, the vice dean and
chief administrator officer of Columbia College, the dean of
undergraduate student life, and the associate dean for student
and family support.
Without objection, I submit it to the record.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. DAVIDAI. Mr. Chair, may I comment on that article for
one----
Chairman SMITH. Yes, please.
Mr. DAVIDAI. One thing to note in that article is not just
their ridiculing of everything that is going on, but the fact
that, as a panel of Jewish individuals were speaking about the
problems of antisemitism, these administrators used an
antisemitic trope saying that this Jewish person is using this
moment for fundraising. So it is not just cowardice, it is
callousness.
Chairman SMITH. It is terrible.
Mr. Moore.
Mr. MOORE of Utah. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you to all of
our witnesses for being here.
Much of what I have prepared and want to say has largely
been said, so there will be some repetition in what I
communicate in my few minutes here, and I am going to pose one
question to all of you and, to the extent we have time, I am
open to hear from any of you about what can we do to change
this trajectory right now?
I have talked to folks, particularly someone that went to a
university that would have been tied up into this, into what I
view as just complete lawlessness and nonsense that went on to
our campuses, and she was telling me the story about, like, you
know, We actually had a case study. We talked about this
region. We understood the plight of both the Jewish state, as
well as the Palestinian state, and the and the Palestinians.
And I have actually been to Ramallah. I have met with folks
that run the banking system there, and individuals, and
Palestinians, and the difficulties they have for what their
future looks like. I mean, and she is like, ``We went through a
case study. It was one of the most enlightening things that I
experienced.'' That is what our college campuses should be
doing.
What we saw recently with these encampments and the
lawlessness that takes place is the exact opposite of what we
need to experience on our college campuses. So my question to
you all is, what can we do to actually, you know, change the
trajectory of the way our universities are going when difficult
things come up?
There has been probably very, very few things that have
been as emotional for me in my time in Congress than to be--and
I am not saying--we are nowhere near close to it, but seeing
what took place on October 7 is probably one of the most
emotional things that has happened that I have--to me. There
was a father of four, he jumped on a grenade to save his boys.
I have four boys about that same age. I didn't know something
could happen so far away, even though I have been to those
kibbutzes where it took place.
And then to see--to know this was ultimately the plan, this
was Iran's plan all along. They want the public sentiment to
change on Israel, and they want what is going on to actually
happen. I wish students could understand the big picture. And
how do we get back to being able to communicate it?
I will mention one thing, and especially now that my
colleague, Mr. Schneider, is here. I have never been--as
emotional as that was, I have never been more proud of any work
that we have done that, in the aftermath of that, Mr. Schneider
and my colleague, Mr. Panetta, and I have led numerous efforts
to make sure that we support and find ways--for the conflict
that is going to be going on in Gaza, to find ways out, and to
help the humanitarian effort, hosting the State Department. The
three of us have done yeomen's work on figuring this out.
And so we are all trying to deal with it. It is a difficult
situation. It is tragic. Let me pose that question. Mr. Marcus,
I would love to start with you. Just like, what can we do? Do
university presidents have to really crack down, or what can we
be doing to improve the way we communicate our dialogue and be
able to get our dialogue out there, so people actually learn,
instead of there being just chaos?
Mr. MARCUS. Congressman Moore, over this summer, the best
of our college administrators are working around the clock to
tighten up their policies on conduct, protest, and the like,
while the worst of our administrators are ignoring this and
allowing things to worsen. Frankly, they will all likely fail
if they only look at policies and don't look more deeply at
what is leading to this cultural problem.
Why is it that universities that should be a source of
light and tolerance have become the opposite? That is systemic,
and it goes beyond policies and to how they build their
faculty, their curriculum, their student body, et cetera.
Mr. MOORE of Utah. Doctor, I would welcome you.
Mr. PIDLUZNY. So on this particular issue I think we have
to acknowledge that there has been a concerted effort to change
the way Israel is taught about and how the region is taught
about, going back to the 1970s. The reason for those gifts was
to change the way elite universities teach about the region.
``The New York Times,'' if you read ``The New York Times'' from
the 1970s and the 1980s, there are a lot of stories about
alarm, about the money coming in.
And so I think the money needs to be shut off, and I think
we need to bring viewpoint diversity to our public affairs
disciplines.
Mr. MOORE of Utah. Excellent.
Professor.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Five things that I think every university
should do.
One, permanently ban every pro-terrorist student
organization. Suspensions are a slap on the wrist that does
nothing.
Two, expel the leaders. They know who the leaders of these
organizations are. Most of the students protesting are good
people, but the leaders need to be held accountable.
Three, every one of these organizations has a faculty
advisor. Those faculty advisors should be sanctioned and may be
fired.
Four, every faculty that supports terrorism, that openly
celebrates Hamas, Islamic Jihad, should not be allowed to
interact with undergraduates, graduates, any student. They can
still have their job, but they are not allowed to be with any
students.
And five, every university should adopt the IHRA definition
of antisemitism. If it is good enough for the U.S. Congress, if
it is good enough for the President of the United States, it
should be good enough for the president of Colombia.
Mr. MOORE of Utah. Thank you, all.
Thank you, Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Mr. Panetta.
Mr. PANETTA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to all the
witnesses.
And of course, Mr. Deutch, it is always good to see you. As
I told you prior to your leaving, you are one of those members
that we miss. So thank you for being here today in this
capacity, especially.
I think we can all agree that all students deserve a safe
place to learn, free from hate speech and discrimination. And I
think we understand that free speech and protest, though, are
part of university life. However, when protests turn violent,
demonstrators break the law, and our debates devolve into hate
speech, actions need to be taken.
What I think is an issue, though, is that when it comes to
policies to govern protests and speech on campuses, there are
just different standards and difficult standards to meet. When
it comes to the First Amendment, there are different policies
for public universities which are bound by the First Amendment,
and private universities, which are not.
Two, also we know that, to receive Federal funds, colleges
must adhere to the Civil Rights Act, but that bar to prove
discrimination in court is very high.
And another issue is that universities have enforced their
rules unevenly, as many of you have discussed today. We have
seen college administrators curtail speech in certain areas to
accommodate students, even for some microaggressions. Yet the
same administrators appear unmoved by the distress of Jewish
students. Ensure all colleges have limits on time, place, and
manner of protest so students can attend class, but they are
implemented differently.
We know that there are examples of universities getting
this right by addressing antisemitic actions, while shutting
down protests that endanger the campus community. I saw that in
my district at a local university, and it was even written
about by a student who wanted to get to class, and appreciated
the university's actions to clear the protest.
Now, unfortunately, though, some of these positive examples
are overshadowed by the missteps of others. When university
administrators have taken action against demonstrations they
have been accused for going too far, as well. Moreover, heavy-
handed policing can galvanize protesters and prove
counterproductive. Despite that, though, we should ensure that
the positive examples are followed, and that we have mechanisms
in place to support Jewish students and address and prevent
antisemitic incidents on campus.
Look, we can agree that colleges should protect the rights
of students to raise their hands in class, in which they can
make claims about the Jewish state or even express misguided
support for a terrorist organization, because the airing of bad
ideas is an important part not just of college life, but of
American life. But letting protesters yell, ``Intifada,'' and
intimidating Jewish students trying to get to class is not
consistent with free speech, nor is there a free speech right
to occupy parts of a university.
And yes, we support freedom of assembly as part of the
First Amendment, but that does not mean that protesters have a
right to assemble anywhere if it means that it prevents other
people from using public spaces. And, of course, damaging
property and defacing statues is a crime, whether you are on
campus or in a public park. So if there are lawbreakers that
are practicing civil disobedience, they need to do it in a way,
as Martin Luther King, Jr. said: ``Do it openly, do it
lovingly, but do it with the willingness to accept the
penalty.''
Now, look, all of you have expressed disappointment in your
testimony about the responses from colleges on this issue. We
can condemn antisemitic speech from students. However, it is
ultimately up to the university leaders to protect students on
campus.
Now, Mr. Deutch, you talked with my colleague's questions
about what Congress can do. What should universities be doing
to address some of these issues that I talked about so that we
can prepare for the coming school year to ensure that
basically, yes, we protect free speech, but we also crack down
on hate speech?
Mr. DEUTCH. Well in order--first of all, it is good to see
you, Congressman, and thank you for your very thoughtful
comments.
It starts with acknowledging that universities have the
primary responsibility here, that as they are looking ahead to
the fall, they are taking action like we have seen at other
universities where, number one, they are speaking out with
moral clarity about what is and isn't acceptable; about, as
Professor Davidai points out, there can be no tolerance for the
support of terrorism on campus.
This has been a really interesting conversation. In real
life on college campuses, there are students who are actively
speaking out in support of the terrorists who committed the 10/
7 atrocity. They should be speaking with more clarity. They
should be making sure that the code of student conduct on
every--on their campus has been updated to reflect the moment.
It should be clear what the repercussions are if it is
violated. They should make every student acknowledge what those
repercussions are--we have heard this earlier--so that it is
clear what will happen, and then they need to actually follow
through if the code of student conduct is violated.
Those are all important steps that they should be putting
in place right now, before a single student comes back to
campus, to set a tone for what is and isn't acceptable to
create the kind of university community that every university
president claims that they want.
Mr. PANETTA. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Ms. Van Duyne.
Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I request
a unanimous consent to insert for the record a campus-wide
email that Cornell President Martha Pollack sent on May 14,
2024.
Chairman Smith. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you, and I would like to read a short
excerpt from it.
``Dear Cornellians, last evening the Coalition for Mutual
Liberation voluntarily took down their encampment on the Arts
Quad. While I do not condone the encampment, which was in clear
violation of university policies, I want to acknowledge and
express gratitude that, in contrast to what has taken place at
some other universities, that participants here remained a
peaceful and non-violent throughout, and, for the most part,
they tried to minimize the disruption caused. With this in
mind, and provided no further violations of university policy
occur, we are able to pause on issuing additional suspensions
and disciplinary referrals. The participants in the encampment
shared that members of our Jewish community who have criticized
Israel have been targeted with slurs, which not only is deeply
offensive, but also trivializes the memory of the Holocaust.
Other students involved in the encampment shared experiences of
being called terrorists over the past few months in an
expression of anti-Arab discrimination and hatred. No matter
one's political beliefs, using such rhetoric, which questions
the basis of someone's religious, cultural, ancestral, or any
form of identity is unacceptable, and I implore everyone in our
community to think carefully about their words.''
It is disappointing that, after the chaos and the distress
that were caused by mobs of students who set up illegal
encampments that raged with antisemitism across the country--
and Ms. Dror, you described this as anything but peaceful and
non-disruptive--but it is disappointing that one of President
Martha Pollack's last acts as the president of Cornell
University is to express concern that a single student in the
encampment says that they were called a slur after Jewish
students on Cornell's campus feared for their lives after
numerous death threats and harassment that raged for months
without end.
Ms. Dror, I want to thank you again for taking the time to
testify before this committee. Can you please share with us how
you felt when you received this email?
And how did you feel when you read that the president of
your university said that the encampment participants here
remained peaceful and non-violent?
Ms. DROR. Congresswoman, it is great to see you, and I
really appreciate this question, because this email was
actually the moment I decided not to attend my graduation.
This is laughable. I have spent the past eight months being
called a Nazi because I believe in the existence of the State
of Israel. And for her to protect students falsely
mischaracterizing Israel defending itself as a genocide in the
name of trivializing the Holocaust is laughable and shameful.
I also want to bring up a point that you mentioned in that
email. She said, ``A Jewish student that criticized Israel.''
No, these students called for the complete elimination of the
Jewish State, and every single Jew inside of it. They are
calling for a Jewish genocide.
Also she mentioned that these students have been referred
to on campus as terrorists. These students are openly
supporting the PFLP, Hamas, and Hezbollah. They are also
regularly terrorizing Jewish students on campus by threatening
them and intimidating them.
It is no surprise that Martha Pollack protects the students
behind the encampment when $1.8 billion are funneled into
Cornell by United States'' adversaries.
Ms. VAN DUYNE. I appreciate your comments.
We have had a lot of discussion now about some of the lack
of actions that were taken against not just the students, but
of the faculty. And you mentioned specifically Professor
Russell Rickford. I understand that he was on paid leave. I
also understand that he is coming back to campus to teach next
semester. Your comments on how to handle that is quite clear.
And I think, as a committee, looking at universities and
whether or not they are teaching anti-American hate, where they
are teaching things that are specifically aimed at creating
distrust, division, violent outbursts that are being promoted
by their own professors, their own administration, I think that
is something that we have to take seriously--whether or not
that is on campus or off campus, if they are putting out
stories, if they are putting out articles--yes, while that may
not have been written on campus, it does say a lot, and it does
reflect a lot on the university and whether or not these
universities are actually upholding a pro-America position. And
yet they are getting taxpayer-funded dollars, and they are also
getting tax-exempt status.
And I know that this is something that the chairman takes
seriously, has spent a lot of time looking into, and that, as a
committee, we are going to continue to look into. So again,
thank you very much.
And I yield back my time.
Ms. DROR. Thank you.
Chairman SMITH. Mr. Feenstra.
Mr. FEENSTRA. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to congratulate you, Ms. Dror, on graduating. I had
three kids that graduated this year. So it is awesome, it is
awesome, and I wish you the best as you move forward in your
life.
I was on the faculty at Dordt University, one of my local
universities near my hometown. And being on the faculty meant
that I was responsible for the students there, that I was
responsible for their safety. I was responsible for what they
learned. And we could debate, we could argue. But at the end of
the day, it was we do it in a safe environment. And that is
what is so disappointing about this, is that we have a failure
by tax-exempt universities to provide and enforce discipline on
students that are found to violate the basic rules of their
institution. So as a committee, as the Committee on Ways and
Means, we must look at our responsibility, right?
We can always talk about the universities. I get it.
Universities have a tremendous amount of responsibility. Their
board of trustees got to do things. We just talked all about
that. But we have the obligation to decide whether an
organization is tax-exempt or not. Bottom line, that is our
job.
And when you start looking at Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act, okay, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, if a complaint is
investigated--and we can talk about this shortly, Mr. Marcus,
because I want to know about this--but if a violation is made,
to me there has got to be a solution that it never happens
again. And the solution, to me, is losing your tax-exempt
status.
I mean, frankly, this happens in business. In business, if
you violate a certain status or if you are tax-exempt, you are
a non-profit, right, you get your tax-exempt pulled away. That
is the same thing that should happen here. So I want to ask
each one of you.
Ms. Dror, what do you think about this? I mean, do you
think the federal government should act in this purpose?
Because, to me, if you pull away their tax-exempt status,
things change very quickly. Trust me, they will change. What do
you think about that?
Ms. DROR. Absolutely. And as I mentioned before, Chairman
Smith's investigation into these universities have finally
gotten them to act. That is the only thing that is pushing them
to act.
Mr. FEENSTRA. Yes, yes.
Professor, what do you think?
Mr. DAVIDAI. I completely agree with your assessment. The
only thing that I would say is there is no difference between
college campuses and the House committee because they are
training your future colleagues. So if you don't act now, your
future colleagues will not let you act when they get to
Congress.
Mr. FEENSTRA. Well said. I 100 percent agree.
Doctor.
Mr. PIDLUZNY. So the Department of Education should issue
findings that these universities are not doing anything to
ensure that Jewish students have access to the education that
title 6 guarantees them. And at that point, if--it should make
real demands, right? It should say audit your your foreign
gifts, audit your academic programs for anti-Israel bias,
enforce your policies. Take a hard look at how you are
socializing international students to the norms and
expectations of the campus.
And if the universities do not comply with those
expectations, then it is time to begin an administrative
proceeding to end their access to title 4 aid. I also think it
is time to start talking very seriously about raising endowment
taxes and about ending the tax-exempt status.
Mr. FEENSTRA. And you sit on the OCR, you have.
Mr. MARCUS. Yes.
Mr. FEENSTRA. So I would love to hear what you have to say
on this.
Mr. MARCUS. So Congressman Feenstra, it is rare that a
university is adjudicated liable for violations----
Mr. FEENSTRA. Now, why is that?
Mr. MARCUS. It is difficult and expensive to get to that
point.
It is also rare that OCR has formal findings of a violation
against a university. If universities knew that a formal
finding or adjudication under title 6 could jeopardize their
tax funds, you would see them respond much more forcefully to
credible allegations.
Mr. FEENSTRA. Yes, thank you.
Finally, the----
Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Congressman. Look, I want to just
use this as an opportunity to thank you and urge the committee
to keep at this in a bipartisan way. This is not a partisan
issue.
Mr. FEENSTRA. No.
Mr. DEUTCH. You are--we should be looking at every possible
way to get universities to ensure that they are living up to
their own ideals. And if this is a way to start that
conversation and get them there----
Mr. FEENSTRA. Yes.
Mr. DEUTCH [continuing]. Then we ought to be having that
conversation.
Mr. FEENSTRA. You know what? When you affect the
pocketbook, it makes a difference. Then people respond. And it
is a tragedy that that is what it takes, but it is. And these
boards of trustees, the only way they are going to learn is you
take away their tax-exempt status. And it starts with Title VI
in the Civil Rights Act. And it starts with using the Office of
Civil Rights to start fining these schools and what they are
doing, and go after them.
So thank you for--each one of you, for being witnesses.
Thank you, I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
Mr. Beyer.
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and thank you all for
hanging in for more than three hours for this as we come and
go. I am very concerned about it. I think all of us here in a
bipartisan way are concerned about it.
I am--I was disappointed that not a single Republican
joined Senator--Congressman Casten's appropriations letter to
ensure that the Department of Education's Office of Civil
Rights had the funding it needed to pursue actual antisemitic
crimes on college campuses.
You know, we have been working on this in Congress for a
long time. The current rise in hate crimes are deeply
disappointing. According to the most recent hate crime
statistical data from the FBI, race-based crimes reached the
highest level ever recorded in 2021 and 2022. But--and
antisemitic hate crimes rose a whopping 36 percent from 2021 to
2022.
One of the key things we know about hate crimes is that
they are also dramatically, drastically underreported, so that
we know that, even from this limited data, we are not getting
the full picture.
Mr. Olson, Mr. Upton, Mr. Buchanan, all three Republicans,
and I partnered with Judy Chu to successfully pass the Jabara-
Heyer NO HATE Act, and that was to better support law
enforcement to report and respond to hate crimes and set up
state hate crime hotlines so that people who didn't feel
comfortable going to the police station could call them in. And
while that bill is meaningful, we are very proud of it, it got
signed into law, and yet the reporting of the incidents has
gotten worse. It has not improved at all. And at a time when
reporting has gotten worse, FBI Director Wray was here in the
fall to tell us that crimes towards Jews are reaching historic
levels.
I introduced a bill recently with Don Bacon, a Republican
from Nebraska, the Improving Reporting to Prevent Hate Act, and
I would love to have all my Republicans join me on this. It set
up a process where DoJ evaluates jurisdictions with over
100,000 citizens to make certain that they are credibly
reporting hate crimes. The goal is to ensure that we have a
better handle on where these antisemitic incidents are
occurring, how we can better track and address and prevent
them.
And Honorable Mr. Deutch, welcome back. Can you speak about
how a bill like this would be an asset in addressing the
antisemitic crimes?
Mr. DEUTCH. There is, as we have talked about over the
course of this hearing, it is important for us to be able to
really tackle antisemitism, for us to follow through and hold
people accountable and hold universities accountable. We need
more funding for the Office of Civil Rights so that they could
do it.
Likewise, the problem--the reason that the Jabara-Heyer NO
HATE Act was so important--and I applaud your leadership on
that, Mr. Beyer--is because we want to be able to be sure that
we are identifying the hate crimes, particularly as we see this
spike in antisemitism, and especially when we know that
antisemitic hate crimes are often underreported. And the way to
do that is to ensure that there is adequate funding to help get
us there.
So I applaud your efforts continuing to focus on that. I
think it is an important way for us to move forward.
Mr. BEYER. Okay, great. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair at this late hour I yield back.
Chairman SMITH. In Missouri this is still very early.
Ms. Malliotakis.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We all believe it is unfortunate that we need to be here,
and nobody thought in 2024 we would be dealing with this
immense spike in antisemitism in our country. But it is so
critical that we are here together, as Republicans and
Democrats, trying to find the best solutions to stop this.
I would like to thank our witnesses for being here.
Certainly, Ms. Talia Dror, thank you. You are a student in New
York state. I represent New York state, so I want to thank you
for being here not only once, but twice, because that takes a
tremendous amount of courage for you to come here. And I
congratulate you on your graduation. And I am sorry that you
had to miss the ceremony.
Since the horrific attacks on October 7 of last year by
Hamas on Israel, the ugly face of antisemitism has showed on
college campuses across the country. Instead of preparing our
young people for life, and getting them ready to be productive
members of a civilized society, campuses have turned into
indoctrination centers of hate. It seems to be getting worse,
to me. Maybe it is because I am in New York City.
And in the news, sadly, we have seen antisemites boldly
flying the flags of Hamas, of Hezbollah, terrorist
organizations in my city. We have also seen a terrible display
of a sign saying, Long live October 7 at a memorial that was
dedicated to the victims of the Nova Music Festival. We have
seen vandalism of homes of the Jewish board members of the
Brooklyn Museum.
And we have also seen, as you mentioned, Mr. Deutch, the
bullying of Zionists or pro-Israel individuals on the subway
system. Completely unacceptable. It starts with education. It
starts with the classroom. I think we need to work together.
But I have introduced two bills I just want to mention
briefly. I have H.R. 7231, which is the Campus Act, and this
legislation would prohibit universities that have been found to
promote antisemitic activities or that are protecting
antisemitic faculty from receiving federal funding. I think it
is a good bill. I think it is something that would really make
a difference in pushing these university presidents to hold
faculty or these student organizations accountable.
Professor, I know you are also from New York City. I would
love to hear your view, if you support a measure like that, and
if you think it would be effective.
Mr. DAVIDAI. Well, to be honest, being a professor, I
cannot comment on something I don't know all the details of.
But as a fellow New Yorker, we have to remember anti-Jewish
crime is the number-one hate crime in New York City for the
past seven years in a row. This is a spike, but this is not
new. And this has been under the current mayor, Eric Adams's
Administration, and it has been under the previous
administrations. The biggest Jewish population of the U.S. is
in New York City, and nothing has been done.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. It is getting worse. It is getting worse,
and----
Mr. DAVIDAI. Unfortunately. Hopefully, this will stop it,
but yes.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Doctor, I would like to ask you. I have
another bill, H.R. 7232, No Visas for Antisemitic Students Act,
that would revoke the visa of foreign students in the United
States who are members of these organizations and participating
in this activity. What are your thoughts on that?
Mr. PIDLUZNY. Yes, our view is that there are four grounds
of inadmissibility that have been triggered in some cases,
right? So DHS already has this authority to look at these
protests, and try to understand which of the students have
espoused support or given support for terrorism, which of the
students have committed crimes involving moral turpitude, any
who lied in their visa application.
And so I applaud your leadership from Congress, but I think
the Administration could take these actions itself if it wanted
to.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Okay. Well, perhaps this legislation would
give them a little more teeth to do it.
And Ms. Dror, would you agree with something like that? Do
you think that we should be stripping visas from--whether it is
my bill or whether it is the Administration doing it--should we
be stripping visas from foreign students who are committing
antisemitic activity on our campuses?
Ms. DROR. Absolutely. The leader of the Coalition for
Mutual Liberation, Cornell's program, or Cornell's
organization, is on a student visa. He should get that student
visa revoked yesterday.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. That is a perfect example, Doctor. It is
obviously not happening at the Administration level. Hopefully,
we can push them with new legislation.
Mr. Deutch, you are obviously a subject matter expert on
these issues, as a Member of Congress formerly. We would love
to talk to you about education. What can we do more to educate
young people about the Holocaust, about the history of Israel?
We have a Jewish student here who was called a Nazi by a fellow
student. It is outrageous, simply because she supports Israel.
Social media misinformation. You know, these students that
are doing this, they are actually proud to have the endorsement
of Hamas and Iran. What can we do to educate young people both
at the state level and the national level?
Mr. DEUTCH. I can answer that in 10 seconds. It is good to
see you again, Congresswoman.
Look, the--you touched on each of the key pieces. One, on
social media, there are--it is absolutely true that the
majority of young people now get their news in 10-second, 6-
second videos on TikTok and on Instagram. We have to make sure
that the social media companies--that these platforms uphold
their own rules, and that Congress is taking a hard look at
that, as well, to make sure that they are, and other steps that
can be taken.
In the K-12 space, we have got to be sure that, as we see
the explosion in some parts of the country of curricula that
not only don't accurately teach history, but specifically try
to exclude Jews and the teaching of antisemitism and the
Holocaust, that we go the other way, that we make sure it is
not just the Holocaust that we are studying, but the
contributions of Jewish Americans to our country, that Jewish
American Heritage Month is actually observed around the
country, in our businesses and in our local governments, in
every place where we have an opportunity to help educate
people. That is another way.
And on college campuses, our--we have an obligation to make
sure that everyone on a college campus, including the
residential advisors, including the members of the
administration--not just the administration and his or her
team, but everyone in the university--has a chance to learn
again, yes, about the Holocaust, but also about the history of
antisemitism, the history of the Jewish people.
And frankly, it is important for everyone to understand the
history of Israel so that these outrageous claims about Israel
being a White settler colonialist enterprise, that instead they
will actually learn that Israel is the homeland for the Jewish
people. With 3,000 years of history of Jews being connected to
that land, that the State of Israel not only is not a White
settler colonialist enterprise, but that the majority of
Israelis are actually people of color.
There is an enormous amount of education that is required.
AJC, other groups play a role there. Our educators play a key
role there. It is--and I applaud you for raising it--it is the
most important thing that we can do long term to make sure that
people understand the facts so that we can all push back
against the kind of anti-Jewish hatred that we have seen.
Mr. DAVIDAI. May I just add that the majority of U.S.
states do not require schools to teach about the Holocaust?
Only 20 states have rules that you must teach about the
Holocaust. Three more have recommendations, and the rest
nothing. So when, as a professor, at the point when I get my
students to come to class, many of them, maybe a majority of
them, have never taken a class about the Holocaust, so they go
to TikTok.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Thank you for your insight and ideas.
Chairman SMITH. Thank you. I want to thank each and every
one of you all for taking the four hours to be in this hearing,
and for your words. You can count on us not stopping and
rooting out this evil problem.
Please be advised that members have two weeks to submit
written questions to be answered later in writing. Those
questions and your answers will be made part of the formal
hearing record today.
With that, the committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:25 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
MEMBER QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]