University presidents, Republican lawmakers spar over alleged antisemitism on campuses
But the school leaders' concessions and inability to explain why they didn't follow university policies to remove encampment demonstrations fell short of satisfying Republicans..
When pressed by House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain "How'd that go?" DePaul University President Robert Manuel responded, "Not very well."
"Your apologies are a little hollow," McClain responded.
PHOTO: Rep. Lisa McClain speaks at a hearing of the House Committee on Education and Workforce at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. , on May 7, 2025. (Michael Brochstein/Sipa USA via AP)
The hearing, aimed at stopping the alleged spread of antisemitism at colleges and universities, featured the presidents of DePaul University, Haverford College and California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo.
Dr. Jeffrey Armstrong of Cal Poly defended his school and its "vibrant" Jewish community.
"We do not tolerate threatening activity," Armstrong said.
"We deploy campus police whenever there is the potential for trouble, and they make arrests and file criminal charges when justified. In addition, when alleged antisemitism or harassment occurs, we investigate and impose immediate university discipline," he added.
In an exchange with Haverford President Wendy Raymond, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., admonished Raymond for her university's lack of transparency in identifying the school's disciplinary actions.
"For the American people watching, you still don't get it -- Haverford still doesn't get it," Stefanik said.
"It's a very different testimony than the other presidents who are here today who are coming with specifics," she added. "So, again, this is completely unacceptable, and it's why this committee stepped in because higher education has failed to address the scourge of antisemitism, putting Jewish students a risk at Haverford and other campuses across the country."
PHOTO: College Presidents Testify At House Hearing On Antisemitism On Campuses ()
MORE: Education Department freezes Harvard's research funding, seeking compliance with Trump administration
Stefanik has led the charge against antisemitic conduct and harassment on campuses since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack in Israel. Her question -- does calling for the genocide of Jews constitute as hate speech on campus? -- became the highlight of the Education and Workforce Committee's historic Dec. 5, 2023, hearing with the presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on combating antisemitism.
But the hearing, called "Beyond the Ivy League," is a stark contrast from those featuring the schools on which the committee had typically focused its ire.
This time, the university presidents prepared for Stefanik's grilling. The congresswoman asked if calling for the genocide of Jews is "protected speech" on Haverford's campus. "No, of course not," Raymond replied.
"And what disciplinary action has been taken or would be taken if someone made that call?" Stefanik interjected.
"Representative, there have been no such calls, and we would use all of our disciplinary actions to follow through on any such call," Raymond said. "I would never expect that to happen at Haverford, and if it would, we would deal with that swiftly."
McClain told ABC News after her questioning in the hearing that it isn't Congress' job to get any of the presidents fired but that she thinks it should be "considered."
"All options are on the table," McClain said.
"Actions speak louder than words, right?" McClain added. "There has to be consequences to one's actions. And that's what's not happening at these universities. It's lip service."
All the presidents distanced themselves from the answers made in the Harvard hearing and apologized to their respective Jewish communities for their inaction.
"To our students, our parents, our faculty, our staff, our alumni and our friends, I am deeply sorry," Manuel said. "I know there are areas where we must and will do better."
Manuel also spoke directly to two of his students who were harassed on campus last fall, including Michael Kaminsky, a junior who was in attendance at the hearing on Wednesday and said at a news conference on Capitol Hill on Tuesday that he was injured during an assault for being a Jewish American.
"What happened to them was a hate crime. No one should ever be attacked because of who they are. I am sorry for the pain they experienced," he said.
PHOTO: President of Haverford College Wendy Raymond and President of DePaul University Robert Manuel testify during a hearing before the House Education and Workforce Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building, on May 7, 2025, in Washington, D.C. ()
MORE: More than 25 protesters arrested after taking over University of Washington building
The hearing was the committee's ninth congressional event dedicated to antisemitism since Oct. 7. Despite more than a year of oversight, Chairman Tim Walberg, R-Mich., said universities continue to be infested with antisemitism.
Walberg slammed the presidents testifying on Wednesday, especially Haverford College, saying, "The Haverford administration has consistently refused to act against severe antisemitic harassment on campus. It has refused to even condemn these incidents of harassment or hostility in a clear, unequivocal statement, much less to meaningfully discipline the students responsible for these incidents."
However, the liberal arts school has taken steps to address antisemitism in all its forms, argued Raymond, who repeatedly denounced hate speech on her campus.
"I hear you and acknowledge that we can do better and I can do better," Raymond said.
"To our Jewish students, some of you who are here today, I wish to make it unmistakably clear that you are valued members of our community and on our campus. I am sorry that my actions and my leadership let you down. I remain committed to addressing antisemitism and all issues that harm our community members. I am committed to getting this right," Raymond added.
McClain blasted the "hollow" apologies.
"Why did it take them this long to apologize, No. 1, and why did it take them this long to change their policies?" McClain told ABC News. "If they were truly sorry, it should have happened long, long ago."
She warned colleges and universities that fostering antisemitism on campus could lead to monetary consequences, including the loss of federal funding.
"The only thing that these universities respect is the dollar," McClain said. "I know it shouldn't be like that, but that gets their attention."
PHOTO: Rep. Elise Stefanik speaks during a hearing before the House Education and Workforce Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building, on May 7, 2025, in Washington, D.C. ()
MORE: Department of Education lays off nearly 50% of its workforce
Meanwhile, Democrats claimed the dismantling of the Department of Education's civil rights divisions, which conducts investigations on the issues the committee is bringing up in its hearings, runs counter to Republicans' work to eliminate antisemitism on college campuses.
"We have in place systems to hold universities who receive federal money -- to hold them accountable for discrimination that occurs on the basis of religion," said Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., who later stormed out of the hearing during Stefanik's questioning.
Ranking member Bobby Scott, D-Va., said the department has a backlog of 12,000 open civil rights cases but that the agency has slashed half its staff and shuttered regional civil rights offices across the country.
"One is left to wonder how can OCR carry out its important responsibilities with half the staff?" Scott asked.
Jewish Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore., said she can no longer pretend the antisemitism crusade is a "good faith" effort by her Republican colleagues on the committee.
"Instead of engaging with this topic genuinely and constructively, we have another performative hearing," Bonamici said. "It's another chapter in the majority's battle against higher education."
University presidents, Republican lawmakers spar over alleged antisemitism on campuses originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
6 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
DC Mayor Bowser walks delicate line with Trump, reflecting the city's precarious position
NEW YORK (AP) — As National Guard troops deploy across her city as part of President Donald Trump's efforts to clamp down on crime, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser is responding with relative restraint. She's called Trump's takeover of the city's police department and his decision to activate 800 members of the guard ' unsettling and unprecedented ' and gone as far as to cast his efforts as part of an 'authoritarian push.' But Bowser has so far avoided the kind of biting rhetoric and personal attacks typical of other high-profile Democratic leaders, despite the unprecedented incursion into her city. 'While this action today is unsettling and unprecedented, I can't say that, given some of the rhetoric of the past, that we're totally surprised,' Bowser told reporters at a press conference responding to the efforts. She even suggested the surge in resources might benefit the city and noted that limited home rule allows the federal government 'to intrude on our autonomy in many ways.' 'My tenor will be appropriate for what I think is important for the District," said Bowser, who is in her third term as mayor. "And what's important for the District is that we can take care of our citizens.' The approach underscores the reality of Washington, D.C.'s precarious position under the thumb of the federal government. Trump has repeatedly threatened an outright takeover of the overwhelmingly Democratic city, which is granted autonomy through a limited home rule agreement passed in 1973 that could be repealed by Congress. Republicans, who control both chambers, have already frozen more than a $1 billion in local spending, slashing the city's budget. That puts her in a very different position than figures like California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Illinois Gov. B Pritzker, Democrats whose states depend on the federal government for disaster relief and other funding, but who have nonetheless relentlessly attacked the current administration as they lay the groundwork for potential 2028 presidential runs. Those efforts come amid deep frustrations from Democratic voters that their party has not been nearly aggressive enough in its efforts to counter Trump's actions. 'Unfortunately she is in a very vulnerable position,' said Democratic strategist Nina Smith. 'This is the sort of thing that can happen when you don't have the powers that come with being a state. So that's what we're seeing right now, the mayor trying to navigate a very tough administration. Because this administration has shown no restraint when it comes to any kind of constitutional barriers or norms." A change from Trump's first term Bowser's approach marks a departure from Trump's first term, when she was far more antagonistic toward the president. Then she routinely clashed with the administration, including having city workers paint giant yellow letters spelling out 'Black Lives Matter' on a street near the White House during the George Floyd protests in 2020. This time around, Bowser took a different tact from the start. She flew to Florida to meet with Trump at Mar-a-Lago after he won the election and has worked to avoid conflict and downplay points of contention, including tearing up the 'Black Lives Matter' letters after he returned to Washington in response to pressure from Republicans in Congress. The change reflects the new political dynamics at play, with Republicans in control of Congress and an emboldened Trump who has made clear he is willing to exert maximum power and push boundaries in unprecedented ways. D.C. Councilmember Christina Henderson said she understands Bowser's position, and largely agrees with her conclusion that a legal challenge to Trump's moves would be a long shot. Trump invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act in his executive order, declaring a 'crime emergency' so his administration could take over the city's police force. The statue limits that control to 30 days unless he gets approval from Congress. 'The challenge would be on the question of 'Is this actually an emergency?'' said Henderson, a former congressional staffer. 'That's really the only part you could challenge.' Henderson believes the city would face dim prospects in a court fight, but thinks the D.C. government should challenge anyway, 'just on the basis of precedent.' Trump told reporters Wednesday that he believes he can extend the 30-day deadline by declaring a national emergency, but said "we expect to be before Congress very quickly.' 'We're gonna be asking for extensions on that, long-term extensions, because you can't have 30 days," he said. 'We're gonna do this very quickly. But we're gonna want extensions. I don't want to call a national emergency. If I have to, I will.' Limited legal options Bowser's response is a reflection of the reality of the situation, according to a person familiar with her thinking. As mayor of the District of Columbia, Bowser has a very different relationship with the president and federal government than other mayors or governors. The city is home to thousands of federal workers, and the mass layoffs under DOGE have already had a major impact on the city's economy. Her strategy has been to focus on finding areas where she and the new administration can work together on shared priorities. For now, Bowser appears set to stick with her approach, saying Wednesday that she is focused on 'making sure the federal surge is useful to us.' During a morning interview with Fox 5, she and the city's police chief argued an influx of federal agents linked to Trump's takeover would improve public safety, with more officers on patrol. Police chief Pamela Smith said the city's police department is short almost 800 officers, so the extra police presence 'is clearly going to impact us in a positive way.' But Nina Smith, the Democratic strategist, said she believes Bowser needs a course correction. 'How many times is it going to take before she realizes this is not someone who has got the best interests of the city at heart?" she asked. 'I think there may need to be time for her to get tough and push back.' Despite Trump's rhetoric, statistics published by Washington's Metropolitan Police show violent crime has dropped in Washington since a post-pandemic peak in 2023. A recent Department of Justice report shows that violent crime is down 35% since 2023, reaching its lowest rate in 30 years.
UPI
7 minutes ago
- UPI
Trump revokes Biden antitrust EO targeting monopolies
President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order revoking a Biden-era antitrust initiative. Photo by Will Oliver/UPI | License Photo Aug. 14 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump on Wednesday rescinded a signature Joe Biden-era initiative aimed at promoting competition in the U.S. economy and curbing monopolies, especially in the technology industry. Trump revoked Biden's Executive Order 14036 with an executive order of his own. The far-ranging EO 14036 was signed by Biden in July 2021 to bolster antitrust enforcement to "promote the interests of American workers, businesses and consumers" and protect them from economic consolidation. Trump offered no reason for the revocation, though the Justice Department celebrated the move, saying it will use this as an opportunity to "recalibrate and modernize" its approach to competition policy. "America First Antitrust focuses on empowering the American people in the free markets, not enabling regulators and bureaucrats to prescribe outcomes," Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater of the Justice Department's Antitrust Division said in a statement. "We are unleashing the new American Golden Age through antitrust enforcement that removes barriers to innovation and opportunity and limits regulatory burdens on free competition." The Justice Department also criticized the Biden initiative as "overly prescriptive and burdensome," and said that the Trump administration is focused on crafting executive orders that are "tailored" and call for lowering drug prices and reducing regulatory barriers.
New York Post
36 minutes ago
- New York Post
Beto O'Rourke slams Trump admin, compares 2025 America to 1933 Germany
Former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke remarked how he 'can only imagine the history books' that will be written about the people of 2025, and likened it to 1933 Germany on Wednesday. The Democrat appeared with Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., on the governor's podcast 'This is Gavin Newsom,' where he commented on Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton investigating his Powered by People PAC for allegedly violating the law by assisting Texas state Democrats' travel out of the state to avoid a quorum during a redistricting standoff. Advertisement O'Rourke lauded the efforts of the Texas Democrats, calling them some of the 'very last lines of defense' of democracy. By contrast, he predicted Republicans, and by extension, the Trump administration, would be remembered similarly to the rise of the Nazi Party in Germany. 'I can only imagine the history books written 100 years from now looking at the people of 2025,' O'Rourke said. 'It's the way, you know, you and I when we were in school, we're looking at the people in Germany in 1933. That guy's named chancellor in January of that year. In 53 days, he has destroyed German democracy.' Democrat Beto O'Rourke speaks alongside elected officials gathered for a rally ahead of a public hearing on the proposed congressional redistricting on Saturday, July 26, 2025 in Houston. Houston Chronicle via Getty Images Advertisement He continued, 'The parliament or the congress, their legislature, passed these enabling laws just like the Republicans are doing in Congress today that said anything you want, you go out and do it. And he goes from being this buffoonish, clownish thug who can barely hold power to the undisputed master and dictator of the German people. And I know this s— doesn't repeat, but it sure as hell rhymes.' O'Rourke has frequently compared President Donald Trump and his administration to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. In 2019, O'Rourke attacked Trump's family separation policy at the border and accused him of calling all immigrants an 'infestation.' 'Now, I might expect someone to describe another human being as an infestation in the Third Reich. I would not expect it in the United States of America,' O'Rourke said. O'Rourke made his comments on California Governor Gavin Newsom's 'This is Gavin Newsom' podcast. Youtube/This is Gavin Newsom Advertisement He defended his comments days later saying, 'Calling human beings an infestation is something that we might've expected to hear in Nazi Germany… Describing immigrants — who have a track record of committing violent crimes at a lower rate than native-born Americans — as rapists and criminals. Seeking to ban all Muslims — all people of one religion — what other country on the face of the planet does that kind of thing?' In 2021, O'Rourke also warned the US could become Nazi Germany within 10 years despite Trump losing the 2020 election. Fox News Digital broke the news earlier that day that Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has called for the Justice Department to also investigate O'Rourke's PAC for potentially violating the law by raising funds for Texas Democrats fleeing the state.
