Opinion - Hypocritical outrage over Trump's crackdown on universities
These naysayers would have us believe that such outcomes risk our very democracy, and that the government has no business applying a heavy hand in the name of protecting Jewish students from violence, intimidation and harassment.
They would, however, do well to consider the hypocrisy of their position.
Those raising the alarms might imagine an executive order directing federal troops onto campuses in the name of protecting Jewish students. Or they might imagine a Supreme Court decision endorsing the 'weaponization of the IRS against a political adversary of the president' through the revocation of the tax-exempt status of a private university, as Harvard professor and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers recently lamented.
Such possibilities are easy to imagine because this has all happened before.
The former occurred when President Dwight Eisenhower issued Executive Order 10730 on Sept. 24, 1957, ordering federal troops to the campus at Central High School in Little Rock, Ark. to enforce racial desegregation.
The latter happened in 1983, when the Supreme Court issued its decision in Bob Jones University v. U.S. The court ruled that the private Christian university's First Amendment rights did not override the 'fundamental' governmental interest in 'eradicating racial discrimination in education.' In that case, the government opposed Bob Jones University's admissions practices for Black applicants and its ban on interracial dating.
I imagine that today's incessant handwringers, raising alarms and fretting over lost freedoms, would have fully supported the presence of federal troops in Little Rock and the revocation of Bob Jones University's tax-exempt status. To them, the argument would have been simple: Schools can enjoy federal assistance or they can discriminate in ways that violate federal law, but they cannot do both at the same time.
So why the inconsistency? Why is it permissible to punish Bob Jones for discriminating against Black students but not Harvard for throwing its Jewish students to the wolves?
Antisemitism on college campuses since the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 has skyrocketed to dizzying levels, with no meaningful steps taken to address it — that is, until the Trump administration forced the issue. Up to that point, 83 percent of Jewish college students either experienced or witnessed antisemitic incidents. Sixty-six percent believed that their university would not prevent antisemitic incidents. Forty-one percent said they were forced to hide their Jewish identities, according to a survey by the Anti-Defamation League.
At Cooper Union in New York, Jewish students hid in the library as crowds shouting 'Free Palestine' banged on the windows and doors. Cornell University still employs Professor Russell Rickford, who shouted into a microphone that Oct. 7 was 'exhilarating' and 'energizing.' At San Francisco University, vandals defaced the Hillel Center with the word 'Khaybar,' a reference to early Muslims slaughtering a tribe of Jews.
Columbia University still employs Professor Frank Guridy, who held a 'teach-in' class in its encampment, a space Jewish students were only permitted to enter if they disclaimed their identity as 'Zionist.' As the vast majority of American Jews identify as Zionist, almost all Jews were banned from this swath of campus and Guridy's class.
Few dispute that the situation for Jews on campus has been dire, nor is there much dispute that universities have failed to protect their Jewish students. Rather, today's apologists for these universities claim to place the sanctity of freedom of speech above all else. Never mind that these same apologists were totally silent when angry mobs shut down university classes or events with pro-Israel speakers. Never mind that not one of them spoke out when the Biden administration's federal investigation of Brigham Young University implicated another First Amendment right — the freedom of religion.
This is not about consistency, but rather ideology cloaked by a semblance of virtue. Certainly, there would be no apologies for a university that employed professors who were exhilarated and energized by Ku Klux Klan lynchings, or one in which Hispanic students were forced to hide from angry mobs.
By design, federal civil rights laws and federal funding can be weaponized as a cudgel to force wayward recipients of such funds back into compliance with the law. This is a feature, not a bug. They have been used at various points to protect Black, Hispanic, Muslim and gay students. Jewish students have the right to enjoy the benefits of those powers as much as any other minority student.
Susan Greene is a partner at Holtzman Vogel, a law firm based in Washington, D.C. Her law firm does work on antisemitism and has cases involving universities.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
25 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Black people on campuses support fighting antisemitism and also wonder, ‘What about us?'
Antisemitism is abhorrent. No Jewish person should ever experience it, and universities must do all they can to eradicate it on campuses. The Trump administration is pushing colleges and universities to address antisemitism by threatening, freezing and revoking federal funding and demanding millions of dollars to settle allegations — or in UCLA's case, $1 billion. These unprecedented federal penalties, which the government claims are partially for failing to address antisemitism, leave lots of Black people who either attended or worked at predominantly white institutions asking, 'What about us?' Reports of antisemitism sound familiar to Black people who have encountered anti-Black harassment in similar forms. Generations of Black collegians and employees have been called racial slurs on campuses. The N-word also has been spray-painted and nooses have been hung on Black students' dorms, on Black culture centers and on portraits and statues of influential Black people across campuses. Student body presidents who are Black, as well as other Black student organization leaders and employees, have received death threats. One social media post promised: 'I'm going to stand my ground tomorrow and shoot every black person I see.' Black people have been physically assaulted on campus grounds; been threatened and targeted by white supremacist hate groups who gain access to campuses; and been racially profiled by campus security personnel. Black campus police officers have reported experiencing 'unbearable' racism themselves. For decades, predominantly white sororities and fraternities have denied Black students membership on the basis of race. Additionally, too many Greek-letter organizations have hosted blackface parties mocking Black people, including some attendees wearing nooses around their necks and others pretending to be enslaved Africans or white enslavers. These and other encounters with anti-Black racism are long-standing, persistent and pervasive. Asking 'what about us' is not intended to diminish the severity of antisemitism or the dangers that Jewish students face. Posing this question also does not indicate that Black people are antisemitic. It comes neither from a standpoint of hatred toward nor carelessness for Jewish people. In fact, firsthand encounters with unchecked racism and harassment on campuses deepen many Black people's empathy for and outrage on behalf of anyone experiencing discrimination and hate, including Jews. And many Jewish people who are Black know such hostility all too well, having faced both antisemitism and anti-Black racism. According to FBI data published in 2024, of the 950 religiously motivated hate crimes that occurred at educational institutions between 2018 and 2022, 78.4% were targeted at Jewish people. That is terrible and unacceptably high. During those same years, the statistics also show that of the 2,624 racially motivated hate crimes on campuses, 64.4% were targeted at Black people. That also is terrible and unacceptably high. Educational institutions across the U.S. clearly have serious problems with hate crimes against both Jewish and Black people. But for some reason, the Trump administration is neglecting to hold colleges and universities financially accountable for one like it is the other. For more than two decades, I have conducted research on campus racial climates. Surveys of and interviews with millions of students, faculty and staff on hundreds of campuses turned up numerous examples of antisemitism and far more examples of anti-Black racism. Volume and frequency do not make one any more or less important than the other. Both deserve fierce institutional and governmental responses. Islamophobia, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, weight and body-type bias, ableism, ageism and every other form of discrimination and abuse also deserve the most serious forms of accountability. But that has not happened, at least not in the manner or to the extent that it is occurring now in the name of combating antisemitism. There is shamefully abundant evidence of attacks on Jewish people on campuses. This warrants an immediate response by the federal government, by campus leaders, by state officials and anyone else who has the power to effect change. Meanwhile, Black students and employees are also continuing to experience unforgivably high levels of racial discrimination, harassment and abuse. Why is this not receiving a serious response from the Trump administration? Why has no college or university ever been required or expected to pay $1 billion (or any amount close to that) for the racial discrimination and violence that Black people endure on campuses? From today onward, what price will institutions of higher education pay for anti-Black racism? Shaun Harper is a professor of education, business and public policy at USC and the author of 'The Big Lie About Race in America's Schools.'
Los Angeles Times
25 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump's claim of fighting antisemitism at UCLA is a dangerous charade
Days after UCLA settled a lawsuit brought by three Jewish students and a Jewish professor alleging antisemitism, the Trump administration announced that it would suspend $584 million in federal research grants to the institution, alleging failure to 'promote a research environment free of antisemitism.' Pressing that case, the administration demanded $1 billion from UCLA as part of a settlement, far exceeding the $221 million that Columbia agreed to pay over similar claims. We do not know what the outcome of the negotiations between the government and UCLA will be. The options do not look promising. In all likelihood, a settlement would entail not only a huge financial price tag but also deep concessions in terms of the institutional autonomy and academic freedom. Alternatively, if a deal is not struck, those values could be upheld at the cost of devastating losses to vital medical research, public health, thousands of jobs and the overall economic well-being of the region. It is a true Faustian bargain, with strong traces of a Mafia-style shakedown. And all in the professed name of combating antisemitism and protecting Jews. This is subterfuge. What's actually happening is a shallow and disingenuous plot to destroy the university and the values of free inquiry and debate in the name of a dangerous, illiberal ideology that has been against higher education for years. What this destructive path will not do is make the campus safer for Jews — or anyone else, for that matter. Sadly, in recent years antisemitism has reared its head at UCLA, as at other universities in the United States. And according to evidence presented in a recent lawsuit, Jewish students have been targeted with deeply wounding slurs such as 'Hitler missed one' and 'go back to Poland,' prevented from accessing public spaces and subjected to harassment because of their perceived pro-Israel stances. This is completely unacceptable, and the university must do everything within its power, especially through continued training and education, to create an environment in which such language and behavior are recognized as unacceptable. At the same time, we recognize that Jewish students, faculty and staff are not the only ones who have felt at risk on campus. Palestinian, Arab and Muslim students — and their supporters, including Jewish supporters — also faced harassment, discrimination and physical violence. On April 30, 2024, off-campus counterprotesters descended on the Palestinian solidarity encampment — even though Jewish students publicly pleaded with outsiders to stay away. Fifteen people were injured and dozens arrested. A separate lawsuit, filed by encampment participants who say the university failed to protect them, is working its way through the courts. The situation in Gaza has grown much worse since April 2024 — including a massive death toll and starvation of residents that has been widely condemned. And Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has announced plans to occupy Gaza City that are opposed by the Israeli military itself. Will the Trump administration continue to brand activism calling for an end to this horrible conflict as antisemitic? No good will come to Jewish students — or Jews in general — by providing political or moral cover to the current Israeli government. Moreover, the insinuation that the Trump administration is acting on behalf of Jews threatens to awaken further the antisemitic trope of the manipulative Jew playing puppeteer, with the government as its marionette. UCLA is worth fighting for. And Jews, who have a long, proud history at the school and a huge stake in the well-being of universities, must be part of the fight to defend UCLA. And they have begun to join the fight: Jewish leaders and the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California have publicly opposed the cuts. The old strategy of aligning with whoever holds state power to preserve Jewish interests — known as the royal or vertical alliance — is no longer practicable or justifiable. Rather, we must commit to horizontal alliances with other groups that share a sense of grave apprehension over the dismantling of one of the great institutions of higher learning in the United States. In the past, we may not always have found ourselves in sync with the tone and tactics of these groups. But at this critical moment in our nation's history, we must join together with allies old and new to rescue UCLA, the estimable American system of higher education and the best version of democracy that the U.S. represents. David N. Myers teaches Jewish history at UCLA and is a member of Jewish Partnership for Los Angeles. Aaron Greenberg and Kate Pynoos are founding board members of Jewish Partnership for Los Angeles.
Los Angeles Times
25 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
UCLA's Jewish community unites against Trump's $1-billion demand: ‘misguided and punitive'
A large swath of UCLA's Jewish faculty — some of whom are fervently divided over Israel's war in Gaza — united to sign a letter denouncing the Trump administration's 'misguided and punitive' demand for a $1-billion fine to settle claims over alleged campus antisemitism. The letter, crafted by a handful of professors and signed by more than 360 people, was expected to be sent by organizers as early as Monday afternoon to the University of California's Board of Regents. It also decries the government's freezing of $584 million in research grant funding. 'Cutting off hundreds of millions of research funds will do nothing to make UCLA safer for Jews nor diminish antisemitism in the world,' the letter said. 'It will not benefit Jewish Bruins nor Jews beyond campus who make extensive use of its first-rate medical facilities, ground-breaking scientific innovations, and cutting-edge cultural institutions.' The letter has had a special resonance, bonding people with a diversity of views on the war in the Gaza Strip, the nature of antisemitism and its prevalence at UCLA, which was roiled by violent protests in spring 2024. The signatories — who ranged from a self-described 'anti-Zionist Jew' to ardent supporters of Israel — described their growing anger over what they saw as the weaponization of antisemitism since Hamas' attack on Israel two years ago. The signatories include prominent professors with expertise on Israel, the Jewish people and Nazism. Titled 'Jews in Defense of UC,' the letter doesn't mention the community's political differences, instead emphasizing its shared goal. 'We urge the Trump administration to cease its attempts to deprive institutions such as ours of vital research funds intended to save and improve lives,' the letter said. 'And we ask that it cease its misplaced efforts to withhold funds in the name of combating antisemitism.' In interviews, six of the signatories — whose views on Israel span the political spectrum — described their feelings in more urgent terms. They called the government's actions exploitative and manipulative, arguing that the Trump administration had cynically used the scourge of antisemitism as a cudgel to attempt a remaking of higher education that adheres to the president's political stances. UCLA law school professor Ariela Gross, one of the organizers of the letter, said that it aims to stress to the Board of Regents — who will ultimately decide the UC response to the Trump demands — that Jewish voices at the university 'really want to fight.' 'We do not want to back down,' she said. 'And we don't think that you can negotiate with an extortionist. It seems particularly important for Jewish community members to [express this], given that this is being so cynically done in our name — antisemitism is being used as the fig leaf excuse for all of these actions.' The U.S. Department of Justice, which is seeking the fine, declined to comment. In addition to the $1-billion penalty, the Justice Department also is seeking an additional $172 million for a claims fund for those affected by alleged civil rights violations and UCLA's submission to an outside monitor over the agreement. Negotiations between the Trump administration and University of California attorneys, President James B. Milliken and regents are continuing. Still, UC officials have called the current proposal 'unacceptable,' but say they are willing to negotiate. Gov. Gavin Newsom has said — without offering details — that he wants to sue and that UC should not 'bend the knee' to Trump. UCLA professor David N. Myers, another letter organizer, said the prospect of both UC and Harvard University cutting deals with Trump could set a 'dangerous' precedent. 'It's hard not to see some method in the madness to try and bring down these two institutions,' said Myers, a professor of Jewish history. 'If they agree to a settlement, then probably every subsequent institution will do the same. What I find dangerous is not just the bankrupting of these extraordinary institutions ... but also the attempt to impose supervision and restraints on scholarship and intellectual discourse.' The letter came together quickly over the Aug. 8 weekend — via separate conversations that Myers had with Gross and Maia Ferdman, the deputy director of UCLA's Bedari Kindness Institute. Myers said that during Shabbat — the Jewish Sabbath, a time he does not use electronics — he had been pondering the issue. He wondered, 'How can we mount a voice of protest to this proposed shakedown of the university in the name of protecting Jews?' After Shabbat ended at sundown Saturday, Myers turned on his cellphone, where he found messages from Ferdman and Gross. They'd been contemplating the same thing. 'I said that it would be great if Jews from a bunch of different political backgrounds from different corners of the university ecosystem came together and said something about this proposed fine,' said Ferdman, whose institute aims to elevate the research and practice of kindness. Myers, who is director of the Kindness Institute, told his colleagues he would write a draft — and after Ferdman and Gross offered feedback, the letter began circulating for signatures on Aug. 11. Days later, the organizers decided to expand its scope so that Jewish voices from across the UC system could add their names. Zev Yaroslavsky, a former L.A. County supervisor, was an early signatory. He said that the federal actions are 'not going to address the issue of antisemitism on campus,' but that they will 'blow a hole through' the school's finances. 'It's the existence of the institution — that's what's at stake here,' said Yaroslavsky, director of the Los Angeles Initiative at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. The discord at UCLA climaxed at a large encampment set up on Royce Quad in April 2024: Pro-Israel activists instigated a melee, and law enforcement's inability to stop it sparked intense criticism. The violence drew global headlines as campus protests raged throughout the nation. Among the encampment's demonstrators were Jews who protested against the actions of the Israeli government, which launched a punishing war in Gaza after Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack. But the voices of Jews upset over what they have described as UCLA's permissive approach to campus antisemitism also rose in protest. Several people who signed the letter bristled as they discussed how the issue of antisemitism was being used by the Trump administration. Dov Waxman, a professor of Israel studies, said that while antisemitism on campus is an issue, it has been 'grossly overstated and exaggerated to serve other political purposes and ideological agendas.' 'Not only is that kind of exploitation manipulative, but it can also foster a cynicism about the issue of campus antisemitism,' he said. 'Because people will say, 'Well, this is just basically a cudgel, there's not an issue at all, and it's just being exploited.'' Beth Ribet, a lecturer at UCLA who teaches about Nazism and white nationalism in the U.S., approaches these issues from a different perspective than many of the other signatories. Ribet, who called herself an 'anti-Zionist Jew,' said there is antisemitism at UCLA — the most violent of which she said was the spring 2024 attack on pro-Palestinian protesters who were Jewish. 'The discussions that the Trump administration and the UCLA administration have propounded about antisemitism represent a profound distortion of its actual meaning,' she said. 'The problem of antisemitism that they are describing does not match what we are experiencing.' As for the letter, Ribet said it captures the 'bare bones that most of the Jews at UCLA would agree with.' Not all the signatories are current or former UCLA faculty, including David Bocarsly. He served as student body president during the 2012-13 academic year. Bocarsly, who is executive director of the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, which advocates for the Jewish community with state lawmakers, said the withholding of research funds could make it less safe for Jews on campus. 'Now you're pitting the Jewish community against other vulnerable communities,' he said. 'Immigrant, first-generation, low-income college students will be directly harmed by this ... people who need vital medical care from the university system, people who benefit from the research that the university puts out.' Though the letter has been endorsed by hundreds of academics with varying views on Israel's war in Gaza, there were still some notable holdouts. Some members of the Jewish Faculty Resilience Group and the recently disbanded UCLA Taskforce on Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias did not sign. It's a reflection, in part, of how fraught the issue has been on campus. Also among the prominent UCLA Jews who decided to not sign: Judea Pearl, a computer science professor. An outspoken supporter of Israel who has decried a 'demonization of Zionism' at the university, Pearl was the co-recipient of a $1.2-million National Science Foundation grant suspended in late July. On Aug. 12, under a federal judge's court order, the NSF reinstated the grant, which studies how genetics data in mass medical records can be used to identify potential risk factors for disease. Pearl said he was approached to sign the 'Jews in Defense of UC' letter but declined. 'Signing it would undercut the complaints the Jewish community has raised because this particular letter does not propose any constructive step toward addressing antisemitism and the anti-Zionist culture nourished at UCLA in some departments,' Pearl said. Myers disagreed. He said that he does not 'believe that the [Trump] administration's financial threats have anything to do with fighting antisemitism. That is not the turf on which this battle should be waged.'
