The recent findings from the U.S. Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services reveal a troubling situation at Columbia University. Over an 18-month period, this institution failed to protect Jewish students from a significant wave of harassment and intimidation. The agencies issued a formal Notice of Violation, underscoring Columbia’s “deliberate indifference” to antisemitic hostility from October 2023 through June 2025.
The investigation concluded that Columbia breached Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in federally funded programs. The report detailed a “hostile environment” for Jewish students, characterized by threats, verbal abuse, intimidation, and vandalism. With the university’s apparent inaction to address these issues, students felt unsafe and unwelcome on the very campus designed to foster education and freedom of expression.
A senior official from the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights remarked, “No student should have to experience this level of fear and exclusion, especially in one of our nation’s most prominent educational institutions.” This sentiment underscores the gravity of the situation, particularly in light of the recent protests related to the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict.
Pro-Palestinian student groups, including Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace, orchestrated many of these protests, resulting in significant disruptions on campus. Students blocked entrances to academic buildings and even occupied parts of the library, undermining the academic experience for all. The protests reached a level where police intervention became necessary, leading to mass arrests as tensions boiled over.
Accounts from Jewish students illustrate the pain inflicted during these events. One student recounted being told they were “not welcome” in Hamilton Hall, while another faced shouted accusations of having “blood on [their] hands” simply for wearing a Star of David. Such narratives paint a sobering picture of the heightened tensions and fear that permeated the university environment.
The federal findings revealed that many Jewish students chose to avoid attending classes and campus events because they feared for their safety. Some even canceled attendance at graduation events due to intimidation. One report indicated that several students traveled off-campus to study, aiming to evade potential confrontations—an indication of the impacts the protests had on their educational journey. Ultimately, Columbia even canceled its main commencement ceremony for 2024 due to intensifying protests, affecting many students who were not part of the activism.
Columbia’s overall response to the harassment highlighted serious flaws in its disciplinary policies. Investigators noted that the university’s inconsistent enforcement of rules, such as those regarding mask-wearing during protests, allowed the hostile environment to persist. Many complaints from Jewish students fell on deaf ears, with either no follow-up or redirection among various departments.
Leadership at Columbia became a revolving door amid this crisis. The institution cycled through three presidents between 2023 and 2025, with each facing criticism for their handling of the situation. The departure of one president coincided with revelations that Columbia had failed to meet federal benchmarks for addressing civil rights complaints, further highlighting the university’s ongoing struggle to maintain order and support all students.
The repercussions of this neglect have been significant. Columbia lost approximately $400 million in federal funding earlier this year, impacting educational programs and student aid. This immense financial blow speaks to the larger consequences of failing to ensure a safe and inclusive campus climate. Interim President Armstrong acknowledged this shortfall, stating, “The funding loss is substantial, but it reflects the government’s belief that Columbia must do more to protect all students.”
In March 2025, the university announced disciplinary actions against over 70 students involved in the protests, resulting in expulsions and suspensions. Some students received severe penalties, including degree revocations, for their roles in actions that included unauthorized building takeovers and threats.
One high-profile case has drawn attention beyond campus. Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian student involved in protest negotiations, was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and now faces deportation. His situation highlights the intertwining of activism and immigration issues. It has sparked demonstrations calling for his release, illustrating deep divisions regarding the university’s handling of protests and student rights.
Arrests of over 300 students during various protest actions illustrate the extent of unrest at Columbia during this period. In response to the unrest, the university has issued warnings urging students, particularly international ones, to exercise caution in discussing politically sensitive topics. This has led to a “chilling effect” on academic discourse, with faculty expressing concern about the impact on open dialogue.
The unrest has caught the eye of federal lawmakers, leading to demands for transparency from the university regarding protest participants. Some students have sought to block subpoenas, citing violations of academic freedom. This case is currently pending in federal court, and its outcome could further impact how universities manage student activism.
Columbia is experiencing internal divisions that further complicate the situation. Jewish faculty and students feel let down by the administration’s failure to prevent antisemitic harassment. As Shai Davidai, a professor, stated, “It was open season on Jews at Columbia.” Others within the Jewish community support the right to protest while differentiating between valid criticism and antisemitism, complicating how the university addresses these conflicting views.
In light of these challenges, Columbia has recently appointed a new Rules Administrator and initiated a campus-wide safety audit. However, for many students, the damage has already been done. “I stopped wearing my yarmulke on campus. I feared for my safety every day,” remarked one student, highlighting the profound impact the situation has had on personal expressions of identity and faith.
As conversations intensify online, a viral tweet encapsulated the growing frustration regarding the protests at Columbia, questioning the academic legitimacy of some participants. This sentiment reflects the broader unease surrounding the state of order and respect on campus, prompting discussions on how institutions should deal with civil rights, protests, and student conduct in the future.
The Columbia case represents a pivotal moment for federally funded universities in how they address issues of campus unrest, civil rights complaints, and the activism of foreign students. As policy reviews unfold, future governmental actions could increasingly link federal funding to the enforcement of fundamental civil protections, reshaping the landscape of higher education activism.
"*" indicates required fields
