“Congress can certainly shine a light on issues, and they have the ability to hold hearings and put pressure on institutions, but ultimately the enforcement of these laws is up to the executive branch,” Fansmith said. “It’s important that Congress not overstep its bounds.”
He added that the report’s focus on a handful of incidents at a small number of colleges doesn’t capture the full picture of what’s happening on college campuses across the country.
“The reality is that there are thousands of colleges and universities in the United States, and while there are certainly instances of antisemitism and other forms of discrimination, the vast majority of institutions are working diligently to create inclusive and welcoming environments for all students,” Fansmith said.
But for Foxx and her Republican colleagues, the report is a call to action.
“The American people expect Congress to stand up for the rights of all Americans, including Jewish students,” Foxx said. “We cannot allow the dangerous ideology of antisemitism to flourish on college campuses, and we must hold university leaders accountable for their failures to protect their students.”
It remains to be seen what actions Congress will take in response to the report’s findings, but one thing is clear: the debate over antisemitism on college campuses is far from over.
Shattering Ivory Towers
Republicans and Jewish advocacy organizations have praised the committee’s efforts to hold colleges accountable.
Kenneth Marcus, founder of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and former head of the OCR during the Trump administration, stated that the report amplifies what Jewish organizations have been saying for years.
He emphasized that many college administrators have shown deliberate indifference to the rise of antisemitism on their campuses.
Marcus also highlighted the importance of the documents included in the report, noting that litigators will be examining them closely. He suggested that government investigators should do the same, as the documents could potentially expose colleges to liability.
Stefanik, in a news release, described the report as revealing the “moral bankruptcy” of once elite higher education institutions, indicating that they will face consequences in the future.
Northwestern University responded to the report by stating that it disregards the efforts the university has made since the hearings last spring. The university official emphasized their commitment to protecting the community while fostering the exchange of ideas.
Harvard and the University of California, Los Angeles, among other colleges named in the report, chose not to comment directly on the findings. Instead, they highlighted changes being made to address antisemitism on their campuses.
Columbia University, for example, mentioned establishing a centralized Office of Institutional Equity, appointing a new Rules Administrator, and strengthening the capabilities of their Public Safety Office under new leadership.
Despite being involved in the hearings and included in the report, Rutgers University, MIT, and Penn did not respond to requests for comments from Inside Higher Ed.